WHY NOT
THE CHINESE CONNECTION
That makes some sense, given the larger circumstances.
BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
RE DAVID KAISER'S CURRENT POST
"The entire intellectual elite, I am convinced, must also share much of the blame."
I believe that he is right about this, but what might be some incidental implications of his remark?
I am not going to suggest that he thinks any of the things I think, but 'weaknesses' of the US intellectual elite are there for all to see, I believe.
Some of my comments re the compartmentalization of disciplines plays some part in the failure of the intellectual elite, I believe.
Further, it is hard to really coherently refer to an 'intellectual elite' as a distinct and identifiable 'body', in the American public and private academic, and private sector, 'system'.
There are, just one example, political pundits, often with certain academic credentials, politics or economics or medicine or law or management or investment, other than the 'nonacademic' one of 'journalist'.
These credentials, and the scope of their expertises, are seldom seriously questioned, except among the academic disciplines themselves from which these pundits emerge politically.
A larger political voice for them is strictly gratuitous under our system, where no higher authority governs technical punditry itself.
Also the tendency for politicians, and powerful segments of society, to 'coopt' both exact and social sciences, both within and outside academia, is another powerful factor in the processes that got us here.
Good examples are medicine and architecture. Back at the time Ayn Rand, a pseudo-intellectual elite, wrote The Fountainhead, architecture ruled construction projects. Not any more.
Similarly for medicine and the control drug companies have increasingly exerted over the field of medicine.
This presents the spectre of scientific intellectuals, perhaps part of the so-called intellectual elite, serving as handmaidens of this or that political or commercial cause, which they may support, or which supports them, or their research.
I believe that he is right about this, but what might be some incidental implications of his remark?
I am not going to suggest that he thinks any of the things I think, but 'weaknesses' of the US intellectual elite are there for all to see, I believe.
Some of my comments re the compartmentalization of disciplines plays some part in the failure of the intellectual elite, I believe.
Further, it is hard to really coherently refer to an 'intellectual elite' as a distinct and identifiable 'body', in the American public and private academic, and private sector, 'system'.
There are, just one example, political pundits, often with certain academic credentials, politics or economics or medicine or law or management or investment, other than the 'nonacademic' one of 'journalist'.
These credentials, and the scope of their expertises, are seldom seriously questioned, except among the academic disciplines themselves from which these pundits emerge politically.
A larger political voice for them is strictly gratuitous under our system, where no higher authority governs technical punditry itself.
Also the tendency for politicians, and powerful segments of society, to 'coopt' both exact and social sciences, both within and outside academia, is another powerful factor in the processes that got us here.
Good examples are medicine and architecture. Back at the time Ayn Rand, a pseudo-intellectual elite, wrote The Fountainhead, architecture ruled construction projects. Not any more.
Similarly for medicine and the control drug companies have increasingly exerted over the field of medicine.
This presents the spectre of scientific intellectuals, perhaps part of the so-called intellectual elite, serving as handmaidens of this or that political or commercial cause, which they may support, or which supports them, or their research.
RE THE TALENT CODE BOOK AND DEEP PRACTICE VERSUS GENIUS PARADIGM
The author makes some revealing observations about both individual achievement, and social (also familial, national, or civilizational) motivation, based both on recent research and on his investigations.
Meadowmount, Tiger Woods, Clint Eastwood's 'look', Russian tennis stars, Toyota mfg techniques, and many other things.
His comments on comparative educational, and socio/civilizational, paradigms are particularly arresting.
Well worth 'close scrutiny' (those fateful words).
Meadowmount, Tiger Woods, Clint Eastwood's 'look', Russian tennis stars, Toyota mfg techniques, and many other things.
His comments on comparative educational, and socio/civilizational, paradigms are particularly arresting.
Well worth 'close scrutiny' (those fateful words).
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Re Democratic Party Krugman Keynsian FDR 'jobs' solutions to US problems REALLY ONCE AGAIN THE WRONG OLD DEBATE THAT GOT US HERE
The Republicans have long been in the pocket of the really big MNC freer trade cartels, and really want to ignore so-called domestic employment, and economic matters altogether, as no longer directly relevant.
Their agenda is global rather than American in focus, but the average Republican still does not know this because of all the redirected moralistic propaganda.
To fight this pestilence, the Democrats have been limited to largely the same systemically limited economic tools of both parties, for generations now, because they have been limited to the political system within which there are no other, real, more aggressive, economic or social options for the federal government, and the federal government itself would rein in any highly unlikely big socio-economic initiatives of individual states.
You either blindly, and unilluminatingly, 'reduce taxes' and government with Republicans, or 'tax and spend' ('jobs', any old jobs, simpliciter) with Democrats, although technically these 'alternatives' have not even held true, over time, with Republicans often outspending Democrats.
The actual differences between their constituencies, agendas, policies, and basic tools, has not been that great, really, in spite of the shrill rhetoric.
Neither party has had much incentive to change markedly the sliding status quo, and neither has the political will (read powerful political patronage) to move toward drastic reform.
No thought can be given to any larger or deeper types of roles between government and private sector activities.
Little thought could be given, in the present political framework, to agendas in which industrial and commercial sectors were promoted, strengthened, or encouraged, in ways seen so successful in some other countries.
In this context, the notion of creating just 'jobs' simpliciter, or conversely of just reducing taxes simpliciter, rather than inspiring and promoting larger competitive, or even merely productive, domestic initiatives, will not engender a movement out of the economic and political malaise into which the US has long been sinking as against its so-called 'strategic partners'.
Their agenda is global rather than American in focus, but the average Republican still does not know this because of all the redirected moralistic propaganda.
To fight this pestilence, the Democrats have been limited to largely the same systemically limited economic tools of both parties, for generations now, because they have been limited to the political system within which there are no other, real, more aggressive, economic or social options for the federal government, and the federal government itself would rein in any highly unlikely big socio-economic initiatives of individual states.
You either blindly, and unilluminatingly, 'reduce taxes' and government with Republicans, or 'tax and spend' ('jobs', any old jobs, simpliciter) with Democrats, although technically these 'alternatives' have not even held true, over time, with Republicans often outspending Democrats.
The actual differences between their constituencies, agendas, policies, and basic tools, has not been that great, really, in spite of the shrill rhetoric.
Neither party has had much incentive to change markedly the sliding status quo, and neither has the political will (read powerful political patronage) to move toward drastic reform.
No thought can be given to any larger or deeper types of roles between government and private sector activities.
Little thought could be given, in the present political framework, to agendas in which industrial and commercial sectors were promoted, strengthened, or encouraged, in ways seen so successful in some other countries.
In this context, the notion of creating just 'jobs' simpliciter, or conversely of just reducing taxes simpliciter, rather than inspiring and promoting larger competitive, or even merely productive, domestic initiatives, will not engender a movement out of the economic and political malaise into which the US has long been sinking as against its so-called 'strategic partners'.
Re Philip Davis
See Philip Davis' Seeking Alpha article:
Trade War Tuesday: China, Japan and U.S. at Odds
Almost all you need to know, at the moment.
Trade War Tuesday: China, Japan and U.S. at Odds
Almost all you need to know, at the moment.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Re Krugman editorial NYT today
He makes some obvious points for the millionth time.
One problem, alluded to by others, is that federal stimulus money would find many foreign firms vying for it now, very different from the 30s, albeit using some American workers especially in construction etc.
Re another 'structural' view, See post re World Is Flat, etc, on this site.
Also discussions of the blinkers of one narrow 'field', sprinkled throughout the site.
One problem, alluded to by others, is that federal stimulus money would find many foreign firms vying for it now, very different from the 30s, albeit using some American workers especially in construction etc.
Re another 'structural' view, See post re World Is Flat, etc, on this site.
Also discussions of the blinkers of one narrow 'field', sprinkled throughout the site.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
RE JAPAN RETREATS EDITORIAL AND PRIOR POSTS THE END OF COBDENISM NOT THE END OF HISTORY AND THE LAST MAN
It seems that there are now so many politico-economically 'fattened up' Asian regimes, China now being apparently the fatter, that they each can't get enough 'food' for their large economic girths, over there. A quite understandable situation for all concerned.
This editorial, with its frankly militarist implication of 'retreat', also gives the lie to all the Cobdenist free trade pacifism which Americans have been fed, and still are being fed by their Executive Branch, about the peaceful consequences of economic development for all comers. This is so even though China is Japan's largest export market now.
What does that imply re power, and trade as a peace loving pastime?
New or recently developed economies are as unlikely to be peace loving, going forward, toward their erstwhile economic benefactors, or their neighbors, as wasteland countries and regions, shunned by any development, were and are.
See prior post re Margaret MacMillan's Paris 1919, quote from a British diplomat there, 'vicious from the moment of their birth'.
The big bad difference, the terrible, seldom voiced, implication for longstanding American foreign and economic policies, is that developed and developing economies are much more formidable economic and military adversaries, in the global struggle for resources and power, than undeveloped wastelands.
It is not a good direction to have blithely gone, all these decades, really, since the 19th Century, Republicans since 1930 or so. The Democrats were free traders since before the Civil War, for reasons hardly identified with Cobdenism.
See prior posts re Nixon Shock, 1972, Fattening Things Up, Trading Poker, Trading Places, Trading American Interests, Prestowitz, Eckes, cartoons, Maverick Executive, etc., etc., etc., on this site.
This editorial, with its frankly militarist implication of 'retreat', also gives the lie to all the Cobdenist free trade pacifism which Americans have been fed, and still are being fed by their Executive Branch, about the peaceful consequences of economic development for all comers. This is so even though China is Japan's largest export market now.
What does that imply re power, and trade as a peace loving pastime?
New or recently developed economies are as unlikely to be peace loving, going forward, toward their erstwhile economic benefactors, or their neighbors, as wasteland countries and regions, shunned by any development, were and are.
See prior post re Margaret MacMillan's Paris 1919, quote from a British diplomat there, 'vicious from the moment of their birth'.
The big bad difference, the terrible, seldom voiced, implication for longstanding American foreign and economic policies, is that developed and developing economies are much more formidable economic and military adversaries, in the global struggle for resources and power, than undeveloped wastelands.
It is not a good direction to have blithely gone, all these decades, really, since the 19th Century, Republicans since 1930 or so. The Democrats were free traders since before the Civil War, for reasons hardly identified with Cobdenism.
See prior posts re Nixon Shock, 1972, Fattening Things Up, Trading Poker, Trading Places, Trading American Interests, Prestowitz, Eckes, cartoons, Maverick Executive, etc., etc., etc., on this site.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
RE DAVID KAISER'S CURRENT POST
Great summary.
He quotes, at the end, a snipet of Afghanistan politics comparing it with ours.
Is it just a coincidence that Krugman, I think, in a NYT editorial today, had called the current trend here a move toward a Banana Republic?
David and Paul seem to be thinking somewhat alike, at least at the moment.
He quotes, at the end, a snipet of Afghanistan politics comparing it with ours.
Is it just a coincidence that Krugman, I think, in a NYT editorial today, had called the current trend here a move toward a Banana Republic?
David and Paul seem to be thinking somewhat alike, at least at the moment.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
RE CHINA JAPAN ETC ETC
Been expecting it to emerge for some time now. Amazing that such longstanding animosities could be glossed over for so long.
For the US, it is not really a question of 'advantage', but belated additional confirmation of 'game over', really.
'Heavyweight American' executives having questions for the Chinese.........another symptom of much else yet to come.
Casanova hand low wage gravy train coming to a kind of halt perhaps, yet another instance, of something really big, and developing for a long time, in broad daylight, 'catching US policymakers by surprise'.
Kind of pathetic really.
For the US, it is not really a question of 'advantage', but belated additional confirmation of 'game over', really.
'Heavyweight American' executives having questions for the Chinese.........another symptom of much else yet to come.
Casanova hand low wage gravy train coming to a kind of halt perhaps, yet another instance, of something really big, and developing for a long time, in broad daylight, 'catching US policymakers by surprise'.
Kind of pathetic really.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Re The Lowry 10th Anniversary Spencer Tunick Everyday People Manchester UK
Re current art, such as it now is:
See Spencer Tunick's Everyday People, at the Lowry, and on the web.
Rather unusual. A modern rendition of not-so-matchstick people.
I noted, in passing, that there seem not to be any everyday people of color inTunick's current Lowry piece (although Lowry had often included some in his crowd scenes). Perhaps it is just an oversight, or I missed
them, or they did not apply.
I still rather prefer my drawing, below. There are some images of a white
man on the reverse of my drawing, but he is also idiosyncratic in a Lowryesque way.
See Spencer Tunick's Everyday People, at the Lowry, and on the web.
Rather unusual. A modern rendition of not-so-matchstick people.
I noted, in passing, that there seem not to be any everyday people of color inTunick's current Lowry piece (although Lowry had often included some in his crowd scenes). Perhaps it is just an oversight, or I missed
them, or they did not apply.
I still rather prefer my drawing, below. There are some images of a white
man on the reverse of my drawing, but he is also idiosyncratic in a Lowryesque way.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Sunday, September 19, 2010
RE FRIEDMAN AREN'T WE CLEVER? EDITORIAL NYT
NO.
Fools.
That is what the article is all about.
This has been the pattern since the War (WW II).
Unfortunately, Friedman joins the cavalcade of American pundits, over five decades, starting with Japan, SE Asia, etc., arguing that the US should now partner with China on technical innovations, and set up joint projects over there, rather than trying to accomplish anything like that over here by political reforms.
Some US thinkers have long known where those initiatives have lead.
Fools.
That is what the article is all about.
This has been the pattern since the War (WW II).
Unfortunately, Friedman joins the cavalcade of American pundits, over five decades, starting with Japan, SE Asia, etc., arguing that the US should now partner with China on technical innovations, and set up joint projects over there, rather than trying to accomplish anything like that over here by political reforms.
Some US thinkers have long known where those initiatives have lead.
Re entrepreneur Maverick Executive rail to rail nyt editorial language games forms of life Pre Batch market states create market persons cartoon
Many different possible cartoons spring to mind reading this article.
Seth 'Pre Batch' presents an ideal steed for the Maverick Executive to ride jauntily into the sunset of Western Civilization upon.
Think Frederick Remington, Bronco Buster, something like that, for a start.
'Maverick Entrepreneurs': Really erratic: they change overnight, black, then, mauve. Thurston Robert Macaire Howell, will turn on you, overnight, one slip up.
Marx had pointed out, 'mode of production determines form of life'.
Wittgenstein had elaborated, looking at different aspects of similar phenomena, in a very different, very loose, but loosely related set of contexts, 'A language game determines, so one could say, a form of life.'
Oligopolistic Market Capitalism has combined these and other 'insights', with still others, technical and otherwise, to generate such nonsensical human 'mercantile' forms of behavior, unmoored from all that had gone before, really.
Market states create, among many other innovations, so called 'market language games persons' (there is not one kind of game, but a whelter of them, just as there is not one kind of 'market game person', but many kinds).
A helpful fool to the truly Hitlerian entrepreneur, say Gilligan, 'one mistake, little buddy, out of the 'life boat', stultifera navis!'
That's the model for global start up success here in America.
Hypomania is also, oddly enough, arguably, a description of a really good hunting dog; some might equivocate on this.
You don't stay with these good quick ventures. Venture capitalists are short term pimps of the Casanova hand.
Hit and run investing, make it big, sell before the idea is stolen in the global underworld, converted suddenly to an offshore mega industry.
We once, long ago, had one, a bird dog puppy, a Scvngr-like animal, named 'Flirt', really super erratic, totally;
sadly, she was actually run over by a train, broad daylight, 'rail to rail' as the venture capitalists also so picturesquely point out, while we were hunting with her.
Seth 'Pre Batch' presents an ideal steed for the Maverick Executive to ride jauntily into the sunset of Western Civilization upon.
Think Frederick Remington, Bronco Buster, something like that, for a start.
'Maverick Entrepreneurs': Really erratic: they change overnight, black, then, mauve. Thurston Robert Macaire Howell, will turn on you, overnight, one slip up.
Marx had pointed out, 'mode of production determines form of life'.
Wittgenstein had elaborated, looking at different aspects of similar phenomena, in a very different, very loose, but loosely related set of contexts, 'A language game determines, so one could say, a form of life.'
Oligopolistic Market Capitalism has combined these and other 'insights', with still others, technical and otherwise, to generate such nonsensical human 'mercantile' forms of behavior, unmoored from all that had gone before, really.
Market states create, among many other innovations, so called 'market language games persons' (there is not one kind of game, but a whelter of them, just as there is not one kind of 'market game person', but many kinds).
A helpful fool to the truly Hitlerian entrepreneur, say Gilligan, 'one mistake, little buddy, out of the 'life boat', stultifera navis!'
That's the model for global start up success here in America.
Hypomania is also, oddly enough, arguably, a description of a really good hunting dog; some might equivocate on this.
You don't stay with these good quick ventures. Venture capitalists are short term pimps of the Casanova hand.
Hit and run investing, make it big, sell before the idea is stolen in the global underworld, converted suddenly to an offshore mega industry.
We once, long ago, had one, a bird dog puppy, a Scvngr-like animal, named 'Flirt', really super erratic, totally;
sadly, she was actually run over by a train, broad daylight, 'rail to rail' as the venture capitalists also so picturesquely point out, while we were hunting with her.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Re Keynes in the Clouds post and China Japan America Krugman cartoon
One could also show in the above cartoon, above the de la Tour game, Keynes, sleeping rather fitfully, on a cloud, in an elegant smoker.
The caption below might contain an addendum re, say,
'The Open Society, its friends, and its Muse' , or some such thing,
referring, of course, to Keynes. Keynes of course would have objected.
The caption below might contain an addendum re, say,
'The Open Society, its friends, and its Muse' , or some such thing,
referring, of course, to Keynes. Keynes of course would have objected.
Re filibuster
See David Kaiser's current post, and if he decides to post it, my and others' comments.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
RE SORELL CITING HONDERICH ON NOT RETURNING TO NORMAL nyt
'Equalizing global inequality.'
Professor of Global Ethics.........
What nonsense.
See elsewhere here for various reasons why.
'Keynes In The Clouds' might be a starting point, point of entry.
'Greatest good for the greatest numbers'. Comments re Adam Smith follow.
Professor of Global Ethics.........
What nonsense.
See elsewhere here for various reasons why.
'Keynes In The Clouds' might be a starting point, point of entry.
'Greatest good for the greatest numbers'. Comments re Adam Smith follow.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
DAVID BROOKS DAY AFTER TOMORROW EDITORIAL NYT PRINCIPLES OF FREEDOM AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP
He is ostensibly attacking anti statist, actually nonstatist, trends in his own party, which hold up the banner of principles of freedom of the individual and imaginative and creative entrepreneurship against ostensible socialism, and against any noticeable government whatever (Ryan and Brooks);
(I guess they would still want a strong military (maybe entrepreneurial, nimble team players), even though no other big agency left standing? Maybe Big VA for wounded, etc.),
even while David Brooks nevertheless somehow claims unbounded respect for these same authors; it is a not even clever and ill concealed species of plain hypocrisy;
in fact his, and their, views are so close, it really doesn't matter much, and also those of none other than The Maverick Executive, a time honored icon regaled repeatedly on these pages, along with Robert Macaire, the Maverick's ancestor in French satire.
Ideologically, Brooks, like almost everyone else over here, is lost at sea in a stultifera navis looking for the mainland, a three hour tour, but turns out, entre chien et loup, to be Gilligan's Island.
(I guess they would still want a strong military (maybe entrepreneurial, nimble team players), even though no other big agency left standing? Maybe Big VA for wounded, etc.),
even while David Brooks nevertheless somehow claims unbounded respect for these same authors; it is a not even clever and ill concealed species of plain hypocrisy;
in fact his, and their, views are so close, it really doesn't matter much, and also those of none other than The Maverick Executive, a time honored icon regaled repeatedly on these pages, along with Robert Macaire, the Maverick's ancestor in French satire.
Ideologically, Brooks, like almost everyone else over here, is lost at sea in a stultifera navis looking for the mainland, a three hour tour, but turns out, entre chien et loup, to be Gilligan's Island.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
RE BARRY BLITT
I would like for Mr Blitt to do some cartoons.
I am perhaps not as good a political 'librettist' as Philipon.
We live in dumbed down times.
He only needs to clone himself, re his other obvious responsibilities.
A good cartoon might be Blitt cloning himself, in case he hasn't already done this.
(Pygmalion etc. Daumier did a nice one, I recall.)
I am perhaps not as good a political 'librettist' as Philipon.
We live in dumbed down times.
He only needs to clone himself, re his other obvious responsibilities.
A good cartoon might be Blitt cloning himself, in case he hasn't already done this.
(Pygmalion etc. Daumier did a nice one, I recall.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)