Image via Occupy California.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
What the F*WK? "Occupy [fill in the blank]"
To all the "Occupy" movements out there: what the hell do you want? Your 'movement' means nothing, has no goals nor organization, and cannot be compared to the Tea Party Movement given this lack of clarity. For me to take you seriously, organize yourselves (no, camping out in public spaces does not constitute organization) and find a goal!
Labels:
politics,
US Government,
What the FIWK
On the Death of Osama Bin Laden

Enough time has passed - both on this blog and in the real world - for me to feel comfortable writing about this. There are two reasons why I'm choosing to come back now, and on this topic. The first is that, after months of inanity, a story that cuts across the political spectrum - that actually seems to matter - was finally front page news. It may seem strange that I, someone who wrote about leafblowers, was not sufficiently inspired by all the other inanity to comment. But, I felt then and I feel now that not commenting is in a sense making a statement on how I feel about the place of those stories in our political discourse. The second, more personal, reason has to do with my own reaction to the killing of Osama Bin Laden. As in, when I heard the news I wasn't sure how to react. At all. For me, this is strange, as any bit of news - no matter how trivial - will usually elicit at least a visceral reaction from me.
Labels:
Barack Obama,
Death,
emotions,
International Relations,
news,
Osama Bin Laden,
politics,
US Government
Slap Them, They're French
A tip of my cap to fellow FIWKer Royce for dropping this Economist article on the aftermath of the French pension reform protests into my lap today. I have been dying to discuss the situation in France - and especially since Black Tuesday - and why not let this be the forum?
Senator Bunning and "Passing the Buck"
I don't have much time to elaborate on my thoughts on Senator Bunning's filibuster in the Senate this week, and its eventual resolution, but I ask you this: this was a one-month extension; given the current political situation, do we honestly believe this to be fixed with a long-term resolution w/in the next month?
Common Sense with Dan Carlin: Culture Wars
An independent political podcaster, Dan Carlin has been producing his Common Sense show for several years now. I enjoy listening to him because he usually has an interesting angle on topics which isn't replicated by the talking points you hear on talk radio and TV. He therefore gets me to think a little, though I'm not always in agreement.


Labels:
China,
culture,
Dan Carlin,
free speech,
Hillary Clinton,
human rights,
politics
Random Thoughts Thursday
Inspired by Aaron's random thoughts, the assorted links blogs by Matthew Yglesias and Marginal Revolution, and Ezra Klein's "tab dump" posts, here some links I've been reading but don't have a strong angle to craft whole blogs around:
- I enjoyed this transcript of William Faulkner's great acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize in Literature while looking for a transcript of Obama's acceptance speech
- the public intoxication blog's fondness for the scale of 1 to 10 makes me want to use the scale in more daily situations... how much did you enjoy these random links, on a scale of 1 to 10?
- the site It Starts With Us is interesting (if sappy) for its concept, and I agree generally with this article describing why your attitude matters - because you influence others by proxy, and vice versa
- National Geographic has a photo gallery of the Best US Drives; a quiz about Jamaica; and a wintertime photo tour of the US
- the list of men who look like old lesbians that Scott linked to... seriously, it slays me
- Bill Simmons' discussion in his BS Report on 12/7 with Dave Jacoby that they had a fantasy draft of "celebrities most likely to be unfaithful in the next 12 months" a la Tiger... I move for FIWK to conduct more such random fantasy drafts
- I enjoyed this transcript of William Faulkner's great acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize in Literature while looking for a transcript of Obama's acceptance speech
- the public intoxication blog's fondness for the scale of 1 to 10 makes me want to use the scale in more daily situations... how much did you enjoy these random links, on a scale of 1 to 10?
- the site It Starts With Us is interesting (if sappy) for its concept, and I agree generally with this article describing why your attitude matters - because you influence others by proxy, and vice versa
- National Geographic has a photo gallery of the Best US Drives; a quiz about Jamaica; and a wintertime photo tour of the US
- the list of men who look like old lesbians that Scott linked to... seriously, it slays me
- Bill Simmons' discussion in his BS Report on 12/7 with Dave Jacoby that they had a fantasy draft of "celebrities most likely to be unfaithful in the next 12 months" a la Tiger... I move for FIWK to conduct more such random fantasy drafts
The Morality of Incentives
In keeping with my niche of "Business Week reactions" (as Scott called me out on), I found this BW article on the morality of incentives fascinating. The general idea is that introducing money into the equation takes morality out of the equation. A bit counterintuitive, and this assumption is backed up by some studies I am not familiar with, but I find the concept and the suggested fix intriguing.
Do you buy the argument that the current incentive system is harming morality in business? If so, and you were a shareholder of a bank, would you be in favor of completely removing incentives from the executive positions?
Do you buy the argument that the current incentive system is harming morality in business? If so, and you were a shareholder of a bank, would you be in favor of completely removing incentives from the executive positions?

Labels:
business,
Business Week,
incentives,
politics
BusinessWeek: How to Cut Health Care Costs
BusinessWeek's cover article this week is titled "Why Wait for Health Care Reform?" and features the article 10 Ways to Cut Health Care Costs Right Now as well as an accompanying slideshow of ways hospitals can reduce their expenses.
Many of their suggestions are similar to suggestions Atul Gawande made in his New Yorker article over the summer. I would argue that the BW cost cutting plans don't go deep enough - for instance, how can insurers or the gov't mandate "fewer tests" without the medical profession altering the culture in which the decisions to order those tests get made? Gawande makes a strong case that this mentality is deep-seated and growing in the medical profession. Another question I have is that, if insurers have the power to do this now and BW is correct that it would help them, regardless of insurance reform, then why are costs still going up? Why are none of these fixes being considered? Why the inertia preventing improvement? The answers remain unclear.
Many of their suggestions are similar to suggestions Atul Gawande made in his New Yorker article over the summer. I would argue that the BW cost cutting plans don't go deep enough - for instance, how can insurers or the gov't mandate "fewer tests" without the medical profession altering the culture in which the decisions to order those tests get made? Gawande makes a strong case that this mentality is deep-seated and growing in the medical profession. Another question I have is that, if insurers have the power to do this now and BW is correct that it would help them, regardless of insurance reform, then why are costs still going up? Why are none of these fixes being considered? Why the inertia preventing improvement? The answers remain unclear.


Labels:
Business Week,
health care,
politics
Health Care - What the F*ck?
What in the hell is going on with health care. Congress can't pass a bill and in the meantime insurers are charging 7% more next year?? What kind of sense does that make?
Meanwhile all kinds of studies are coming out talking about wasted money in health care and the different ways that costs can be trimmed and service can be better. We have previously talked about ways that costs can skyrocket and we previously questioned what Congress' plan was to reduce costs, or if such a plan even exists. It now seems important that we have one.
If Democrats are actively trying to pass health care reform, why are costs going up? Are insurers actively trying to antagonize the public? Is it a giant middle finger to Congress? Are they trying to get as much cash as they can before legislation hits? Am I even asking the right questions? None of this makes any sense.
I'm so confused. I need somebody to make sense of all this - where is Ja?
Meanwhile all kinds of studies are coming out talking about wasted money in health care and the different ways that costs can be trimmed and service can be better. We have previously talked about ways that costs can skyrocket and we previously questioned what Congress' plan was to reduce costs, or if such a plan even exists. It now seems important that we have one.
If Democrats are actively trying to pass health care reform, why are costs going up? Are insurers actively trying to antagonize the public? Is it a giant middle finger to Congress? Are they trying to get as much cash as they can before legislation hits? Am I even asking the right questions? None of this makes any sense.
I'm so confused. I need somebody to make sense of all this - where is Ja?

Labels:
business,
Business Week,
Congress,
health care,
politics
North Dakota: Very Small
About a month ago Business Week posted an article titled What's North Dakota Doing Right? After reading and considering the article, I have suggested an alternative headline in this blog title.
Turns out Bismarck only has 60,000 people and homes cost an average of $160,000. It's freaking freezing there and it's got 90% farmland, "making it the most rural state in the nation" according to BW. Well, then. May I suggest that if your entire state has fewer people than Fresno (650k) it is not so tough to manage your budget. The recession never affected ND and its 3.6% unemployment because the economy's boom hardly affected the state beforehand - its GDP of $29.4 billion is roughly equivalent to Turkmenistan.
And now to close with a scene from the West Wing:
Turns out Bismarck only has 60,000 people and homes cost an average of $160,000. It's freaking freezing there and it's got 90% farmland, "making it the most rural state in the nation" according to BW. Well, then. May I suggest that if your entire state has fewer people than Fresno (650k) it is not so tough to manage your budget. The recession never affected ND and its 3.6% unemployment because the economy's boom hardly affected the state beforehand - its GDP of $29.4 billion is roughly equivalent to Turkmenistan.
And now to close with a scene from the West Wing:
Donna: Eliminating the term north from North Dakota is an important state issue and the President feels it should be resolved on a state level. While the President is sympathetic towards the cause and understands the large economics ramifications of this name change, he feels the issue is not yet ripe for national attention. The President wishes you well on your endeavors and thanks you for your support.
Man:Uh, Miss Moss? Are you aware that studies clearly show the word 'north' leaves the impression that this state is cold, snowy and flat, significantly depressing tourism and business startup.
Donna: With due respect, sir, your average temperature is 7 degrees. Your average snowfall: 42 inches, and a name change isn't going to take care of that.
Woman: We enjoy roughly the same climate as South Dakota. We took in 73.7 million in tourism revenue last year. They took in 1.2 billion. They have the word south.
Donna: Also Mount Rushmore.

Labels:
Business Week,
Economics,
North Dakota,
politics
The End of the UC As We Know It

From today's Chronicle comes the news of an unprecedented round of fee hikes that, as the article notes, will likely deny access to the University of California system for a large segment of middle and lower-income students in California. That the UC is facing a budget deficit (mirroring one for the State of California as a whole, and exacerbated by the statewide shortage) is not news; that both UC Executives and Regents will be keeping their exorbitant salaries in place while pricing out 10 public universities is a more recent development and one that makes my blood boil. I'm safe - having bid farewell to UCLA 4 years ago - but I cringe when thinking of the future of what was once the most robust and vibrant public university network in the country.
Labels:
budget,
California,
Education,
politics,
University of California
Missing Ted Kennedy

It's been over two weeks since Ted Kennedy died and many of us, as we listened to President Obama last night, finally felt the emptiness his death left behind. In many ways, the loss of the final Kennedy brother shouldn't impact me too greatly - Teddy was from a clan that, by the time I came of age politically, had lost some of its luster; his one campaign for the Presidency occurred before I was born. His death - and his life - shouldn't have been so momentous in my mind and my life. So why is it?
If you haven't read the letter yet, you should. In it, Kennedy speaks to all of us - not just about health care, not just about politics, but about who we are as Americans, and all we can accomplish. In an age of cynicism and lowest-common-denominator politics, it is a refreshing breath of hope and humanity.
Campaign Finance and Lobbyists
Aaron touched on Royce's abject distaste for our current campaign finance process, and it's disastrous affect on US Politics, but I figured I'd let Royce respond to this Foreign Affairs piece on his own. Royce - you're up!

Labels:
Campaign Finance Reform,
Foreign Affairs,
Lobbyists,
politics
Karma's a Bitch, eh Dems?
A friend just linked me to this story about Massachusetts having to wait 5 months to replace Senator Kennedy due to a law they passed in 2004 designed to prevent Governor Mitt Romney from replacing Senator John Kerry with a Republican had Kerry defeated George Bush.

Protest Follies
Direct from the twisted Twitter feed of Shawn Elliott - a former games writer and oddball - comes a series of failed protests. (Warning: these links are okay, but many links in Shawn's feed are NSFW)
Labels:
politics,
protests,
Shawn Elliott,
Twitter
Goldman Sachs as discussed in TIME
An article in the recent Time Magazine is titled The Rage Over Goldman Sachs, and addresses many of the same issues we covered in our previous Goldman Sachs discussion about their buying back warrants. At one point it also directly addresses the Rolling Stone article on Goldman which was the basis for our earlier discussion.
Labels:
business,
Goldman Sachs,
politics,
TARP,
Time Magazine
Health Care: Obama vs Insurers
Two articles in the last week have done an interesting job of describing the current state of health care reform in Congress. The first is Obama's Op-Ed in the NY Times on August 15, laying out the basic principles of his coverage plan. The second is Business Week's cover article from August 6 titled the Health Insurers Have Already Won.
Both articles are informed by our previous health care discussion which focused on health care costs
Both articles are informed by our previous health care discussion which focused on health care costs

Labels:
health care,
politics,
President Obama
America in Balance - Who Knew?
This lovely Economist video really shows how we were a country in balance...until the 80's.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)