There has been a lot chatter across the Internet and Facebook about the latest budget woes. The conservative right was able to make a lot of noise about troops not being paid on time and the left raised hell about not approving a budget that cut out funding for planned parenthood. I saw ripping post waves from both sides about "Provide funding for our troops" and "We must protect a woman's right to choose" all across Facebook. "Repost this if you agree" on social networking sites and forming little groups on-line is fine. It makes us all feel like we're doing something to address the problem. But do we really have an understanding of what the problem is? I don't think it's party hot-issues being threatened or worries about government workers being paid on time.
The problem is that nobody can ever be wrong. Starting from the idea that "Everyone should be allowed to express their opinions freely" we've somehow let it expand into "Every Opinion is equal" and that's just flat out stupid. Opinions are not equal, we look at many ideas so that we can find the best way out of all of them but that second part is what makes it work... finding a best way. Without a "best way" that exchange of ideas is reduced down into a way for people just to feel better about having gotten to have their say. Now that would be alright still if we put our thoughts into an open forum, but we don't. Culturally we've become hardwired to seek approval for our ideas by finding outlets that cater to them. Your Limbaugh, Maddow, Frankin, Beck... your MSNBC, Fox News, and your talk radio, they all speak strictly to their target audiences. We move past the exchange of ideas completely into a system where we hear ideas that fit "What we like" and we hear about how against "What we like" the other people must be. All sides claim to speak for the American people. And relative to the specific audience they do, in a way, speak for the country. But is that what we want?
Do we want political discourse dictated by what we want to believe? A lot of what I've written about in previous posts has to do with the dangers of letting what we wish were true define what we accept as true. And the pundits are a huge part of that. John Stewart is funny but is raw sarcasm the way to go? Beck holds up his version of "The Founders" but we can't build a country that was designed to operate in a world that passed by 225 years ago. At the same time we can't anticipate abandoning all moral principle because we're afraid of what will happen. O'riely and Hannity are just as bad as Maher and Huffington in that they all sit there night after night and re-polarize their audience.
Yellow Journalism isn't anything new, and you'd think by now that we'd be better equipped to deal with it. Instead we've made it part of our personal identity.
So what comes next? Problems like what we saw this week in Washington are what you get when we elect congressmen who are so terrified of losing their extreme party base and alienating their own side's talking heads and pundits that they do nothing. They can't compromise and the "other side" is in the same situation so they can't make moves either.
I'm disappointed that hot button issues like abortion and the threat of soldiers (and government workers) not getting paid are distressing but the situation that got us here is a broken government and people so stuck on their own "opinions" that they won't allow or elect congress-people capable of fixing it.
Bunker in. The problems are just starting.
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Return from Hiatus
The blog is active again. There's a lot of fresh material coming down the pike and I'm going to try to keep on a three updates a week program.
If you like what you read recommend it to your friends.
If you'd like me to look at a specific issue send me an email and I'll put in the rotation.
If you like what you read recommend it to your friends.
If you'd like me to look at a specific issue send me an email and I'll put in the rotation.
Sunday, July 4, 2010
The Job Market is a Stuborn Thing.
The Unemployment numbers came out for the last month, and we had a reduction in overall unemployment from 9.7% to 9.5%. That seems exciting, until we break down those numbers a little further. That's a "Real Change" of 0.002. As of the end of June we still have 14.6 Million people unemployed. A net change of 652,000+ (jobs acquired over jobs lost) occurred. So when we divide it out, 4% of unemployed people found jobs in June. "The biggest cause for concern had been the weakness of the private sector, which created a modest 83,000 jobs in June, well up from May's revised total of 33,000." (Source Yahoo! News, )
What's making jobs so hard to find? Certainly there's a lot of economic pressure. But I think there may be another undercurrent here. Over education.
Starting from the assumption that, like my own, your high school guidance councilor (much like every teacher before him from Kindergarten up to his arrival on your academic scene... and possibly even your own parents) assured you that you could "Be anything you set your mind to if you just worked hard enough." The rational among us instantly (or very nearly so) rejected this as insane, but many people (some of them very bright) bought into this wholesale; not realizing their errors until the real world hit them in the mouth with a bag of bricks.
Exhibit A: My friend Greg who worked hard through high school and college... the man studied like a fiend and worked nights and weekends and ungodly hours at various local grocery stores to make ends meet... and now, finally having attained his degree in "German"... he still works at a local grocery store. (Now with major loans to pay off.)
Exhibit B: My sister spent 4 years and a good chunk of money pursuing an Art degree at Maryland Institute College of Art. She's a brilliant artist, who does amazing work. She's not one lick better at art then she was when she went into the money machine, and works part time at a Bakery... taking yet MORE college classes.
I'm sure many of you know people who fall into categories like this. Rest assured, we will be getting into the WHY of what happened in small detail today, and in GREAT detail in my next post "The Important Role of the Economic Loser."
Why do we work at the jobs we do? What determines which jobs we're going to work at, and which careers we land in overall? It's not lack of effort, at least not always. It's not lack of desire certainly, it's not even always lack of ability. I think that we can't look at what WE are lacking for the answer. If we must refer to it in terms of "Lacking" I'd say the Job Market is lacking what WE want. Worded another way, the Job Market has certain needs and certain overflows. If what we want falls into a need category then we are one of the lucky few. That said, most people will not fall into this category. If your life's dream was to be a basket weaver and you've managed to fall into one of the few basket weaving slots that society has out there then stop reading. For the rest of us, the problem bears a bit of closer inspection.
The Economics of the Job Market boil down to "How badly do we need this done?", "How Many people can do it?", and "How much does the average person want for doing it."
There are, in certain cases, other small factors that impact job creation... but not many. It's hard to find a job that nobody wants done, that anyone could do, and most people will do for free that pays well.
For example, lets look at the "Worlds Oldest Profession".
Has it ever occured to anyone to wonder why there are more female prostitutes then there are male prostitutes? It's hard to compete in a job market where there droves of people waiting to do your job for free. This isn't to say you CAN'T find those jobs, just that you really shouldn't bank on doing it to make a living.
This is starting to run a little long, and we're getting into subjects I want to cover tomorrow... so for now we'll call it a day.
What's making jobs so hard to find? Certainly there's a lot of economic pressure. But I think there may be another undercurrent here. Over education.
Starting from the assumption that, like my own, your high school guidance councilor (much like every teacher before him from Kindergarten up to his arrival on your academic scene... and possibly even your own parents) assured you that you could "Be anything you set your mind to if you just worked hard enough." The rational among us instantly (or very nearly so) rejected this as insane, but many people (some of them very bright) bought into this wholesale; not realizing their errors until the real world hit them in the mouth with a bag of bricks.
Exhibit A: My friend Greg who worked hard through high school and college... the man studied like a fiend and worked nights and weekends and ungodly hours at various local grocery stores to make ends meet... and now, finally having attained his degree in "German"... he still works at a local grocery store. (Now with major loans to pay off.)
Exhibit B: My sister spent 4 years and a good chunk of money pursuing an Art degree at Maryland Institute College of Art. She's a brilliant artist, who does amazing work. She's not one lick better at art then she was when she went into the money machine, and works part time at a Bakery... taking yet MORE college classes.
I'm sure many of you know people who fall into categories like this. Rest assured, we will be getting into the WHY of what happened in small detail today, and in GREAT detail in my next post "The Important Role of the Economic Loser."
Why do we work at the jobs we do? What determines which jobs we're going to work at, and which careers we land in overall? It's not lack of effort, at least not always. It's not lack of desire certainly, it's not even always lack of ability. I think that we can't look at what WE are lacking for the answer. If we must refer to it in terms of "Lacking" I'd say the Job Market is lacking what WE want. Worded another way, the Job Market has certain needs and certain overflows. If what we want falls into a need category then we are one of the lucky few. That said, most people will not fall into this category. If your life's dream was to be a basket weaver and you've managed to fall into one of the few basket weaving slots that society has out there then stop reading. For the rest of us, the problem bears a bit of closer inspection.
The Economics of the Job Market boil down to "How badly do we need this done?", "How Many people can do it?", and "How much does the average person want for doing it."
There are, in certain cases, other small factors that impact job creation... but not many. It's hard to find a job that nobody wants done, that anyone could do, and most people will do for free that pays well.
For example, lets look at the "Worlds Oldest Profession".
Has it ever occured to anyone to wonder why there are more female prostitutes then there are male prostitutes? It's hard to compete in a job market where there droves of people waiting to do your job for free. This isn't to say you CAN'T find those jobs, just that you really shouldn't bank on doing it to make a living.
This is starting to run a little long, and we're getting into subjects I want to cover tomorrow... so for now we'll call it a day.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
"Truth is sought for its own sake. And those who are engaged upon the quest for anything for its own sake are not interested in other things. Finding the truth is difficult, and the road to it is rough." - Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ḥasan ibn al-Haytham, roughly 950 AD.
Recently I observed an argument in which neither side was willing to back off their insistence that the other party was wrong. The question was factual, and in an attempt to be helpful I offered to use my laptop to seek an answer to the question online. Much to my surprise both parties balked. My initial response was to apologize for the intrusion, assuming that I was an unwelcome third party to their discussion. Further confusing me, the two of them insisted that they weren't offended; it simply "Was not worth the time to look it up, they would rather just drop it."
While I finished my lunch I puzzled over this. My laptop was out, I was on free WI-FI and the time it took to seek the answer to the question was minuscule. So why avoid the answer? Wouldn't a resolution to the argument by reference to the facts be a desirable outcome?
For the rest of the day I reflected on this. It began to burn me up little by little. Why would we reject a shot at truth and correcting our own misconceptions? Can we as nation really be this addicted to the "We are the right, they are the wrong!" mindset? I suppose it shouldn't surprise me really.
At all levels we seek answers that have mass apeal far more often then we seek truth. There are people who make their living on data manipulation for both sides, enabling news organizations and pundits to twist the facts in such a way as to make them more appealing to their core markets. What's the end result of this? We only seek the people who tell us what we want to hear. Any voice from the "other side" is rejected outright, and often villified.
"It is proper for you, Kalamas [the people of the village of Kesaputta], to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blameable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill, abandon them. "...Do not accept anything by mere tradition... Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures... Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions... But when you know for yourselves—these things are moral, these things are blameless, these things are praised by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken, conduce to well-being and happiness—then do you live acting accordingly." - Kalama Sutta
Recently I observed an argument in which neither side was willing to back off their insistence that the other party was wrong. The question was factual, and in an attempt to be helpful I offered to use my laptop to seek an answer to the question online. Much to my surprise both parties balked. My initial response was to apologize for the intrusion, assuming that I was an unwelcome third party to their discussion. Further confusing me, the two of them insisted that they weren't offended; it simply "Was not worth the time to look it up, they would rather just drop it."
While I finished my lunch I puzzled over this. My laptop was out, I was on free WI-FI and the time it took to seek the answer to the question was minuscule. So why avoid the answer? Wouldn't a resolution to the argument by reference to the facts be a desirable outcome?
For the rest of the day I reflected on this. It began to burn me up little by little. Why would we reject a shot at truth and correcting our own misconceptions? Can we as nation really be this addicted to the "We are the right, they are the wrong!" mindset? I suppose it shouldn't surprise me really.
At all levels we seek answers that have mass apeal far more often then we seek truth. There are people who make their living on data manipulation for both sides, enabling news organizations and pundits to twist the facts in such a way as to make them more appealing to their core markets. What's the end result of this? We only seek the people who tell us what we want to hear. Any voice from the "other side" is rejected outright, and often villified.
"It is proper for you, Kalamas [the people of the village of Kesaputta], to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blameable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill, abandon them. "...Do not accept anything by mere tradition... Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures... Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions... But when you know for yourselves—these things are moral, these things are blameless, these things are praised by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken, conduce to well-being and happiness—then do you live acting accordingly." - Kalama Sutta
Saturday, January 16, 2010
The Blog is Active Again.
I'm back, I'm writing, and I'm mad.
More to follow, tomorrow I'm hitting this Haiti thing. Soon after that I'm addressing the issue of the police. That might be a 5 part article. I've got a lot to say about that one.
More to follow, tomorrow I'm hitting this Haiti thing. Soon after that I'm addressing the issue of the police. That might be a 5 part article. I've got a lot to say about that one.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Nuclear Options
Tonight things went a little crazy with my circle of friends and I sort of engaged the nuclear option. In my ongoing study into the mechanisms that we all use to interact and make our society work I think it's strange that my personal life should so perfectly dovetail with what I've been reading. It's tempting to try and over dramatize the breakdown in interpersonal relationships but ultimately it all comes back down to a very simple perspective problem. Friendships are essentially a micro-crowd. The forces that effect a crowd, to expand it and make it crumble, all have their parallels in the Friendship Circles.
All things have a natural lifespan. Biological break down puts a definite limit factor on all living things. Companies rise and fall in accordance with need and market force. Crowds spring up and die as issues appear and resolve themselves. Friendships are a tempting target for the label of permanence but that's a very naive way to look at the whole exchange. In reality friendships continue until one party has too much to gain by removing the "Friend" who has become a roadblock. Sentimental loyalty combined with a dash of nostalgia and a healthy awareness of the uses of a particular friend may dictate sacrificing a little more in the name of "keeping my friends" but I'm a firm believer in the old adage that "Everyone has a price".
It follows from that, "Everyone has a value"
I found out my value tonight...
How much do you think you're worth?
All things have a natural lifespan. Biological break down puts a definite limit factor on all living things. Companies rise and fall in accordance with need and market force. Crowds spring up and die as issues appear and resolve themselves. Friendships are a tempting target for the label of permanence but that's a very naive way to look at the whole exchange. In reality friendships continue until one party has too much to gain by removing the "Friend" who has become a roadblock. Sentimental loyalty combined with a dash of nostalgia and a healthy awareness of the uses of a particular friend may dictate sacrificing a little more in the name of "keeping my friends" but I'm a firm believer in the old adage that "Everyone has a price".
It follows from that, "Everyone has a value"
I found out my value tonight...
How much do you think you're worth?
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
China getting ready to cash out?
Bloomberg news reported yesterday that our man in the treasury Tim Geithner was begging China not to liquidate a large portion of the $801.5 Billion dollars they own in U.S. Treasury bonds. ( http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aaVGe5smuZAU ) The U.S. Budget in it's entirety is roughly 3 Trillion dollars a year. So calling in that debt would pretty much chop a nice 1/3 out of that... I can see why Timmy is so set on keeping Chinese dollars in the United States. The problem is that China is moving in pro-business directions across it's economy. The average Chinese business seems to have much less red tape to cut through then comparable US companies.
Treasury Bond ownership is traditionally proportional to the amount of private sector money invested in an economy. Given, China can sometimes blur the line between Govt and Private funds (an entry for another date) but the way to keep Chinese money here is to boost our domestic companies. Treasury Bonds are investments in the governments ability to make money, but more then then that they ease the tax burden on all of us.
Obama is following in Bush's footsteps with all this "stimulus money". The Chinese are worried about the security of their 801 billion dollar investment.
Our current outstanding public debt in the United States is accelerating in growth, it recently topped 11.6 Trillion.
So the natural question is where is the stimulus money coming from? While many of my "dish out the government cash" friends have trite little social-obligation answers, (little to no economic answers to that particular cash flow problem), it's becoming obvious that our foreign investors are asking the same damn questions.
Treasury Bond ownership is traditionally proportional to the amount of private sector money invested in an economy. Given, China can sometimes blur the line between Govt and Private funds (an entry for another date) but the way to keep Chinese money here is to boost our domestic companies. Treasury Bonds are investments in the governments ability to make money, but more then then that they ease the tax burden on all of us.
Obama is following in Bush's footsteps with all this "stimulus money". The Chinese are worried about the security of their 801 billion dollar investment.
Our current outstanding public debt in the United States is accelerating in growth, it recently topped 11.6 Trillion.
So the natural question is where is the stimulus money coming from? While many of my "dish out the government cash" friends have trite little social-obligation answers, (little to no economic answers to that particular cash flow problem), it's becoming obvious that our foreign investors are asking the same damn questions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)