Awesomology 101

12:25 pm - Weird

I woke up at 3:30 this morning in EXTREME PAIN, from the neck up. Every part of my head and neck hurt, it was like it was caught in vices from all sides. Nothing I did made any difference, no amount of medication helped at all. I was yelling and biting my fingers and everything trying to distract myself. Nothing.

Then, around 4:30, it just... stopped. And now I'm fine.

What gives?

08:14 pm - Michael Moore Doesn't Get It

Millionaire Filmmaker Michael Moore: ‘Capitalism Did Nothing For Me’:

Moore said: “Well, capitalism did nothing for me, starting with my first film.”

“You know, I had to pretty much beg, borrow and steal,” he said. “The system is not set up to help somebody from the working class make a movie like this and get the truth out there.”

“In fact, in Fahrenheit 9/11 if you remember, capitalism, the Disney Corporation, tried to kill that film--tried to make it so that people couldn’t see it,” said Moore. “My book Stupid White Men--Harper Collins tried to kill that book so that people couldn’t see it. It's only because I put the light of day on it and told people what was going on did people get the chance to see these things.”

08:39 pm - Opt-Out Public Option

I agree with Andrew Sullivan, the opt-out public option is very very bad news for Republicans (as well as friends of liberty):

Imagine Republicans in state legislatures having to argue and posture against an affordable health insurance plan for the folks, as O'Reilly calls them, while evil liberals provide it elsewhere. Now, of course, if the public option is a disaster in some states, this argument could work in the long run. But in the short run? It's political nightmare for the right as it is currently constituted. In fact, I can see a public option becoming the equivalent of Medicare in the public psyche if it works as it should. Try running against Medicare.

The genius of the opt-out is that it coopts the states' rights argument (just as ending the prohibition on marijuana does); it has the potential to make "liberalism' popular again; it has easily demonized opponents - the health insurance industry; and it forces Republicans not to rail against socialism in the abstract but to oppose actual benefits for the working poor in reality.

11:14 am - Wikipedia Is The News

I was reading a Then/Now feature from Fox (credited to the Associated Press) on the cast of Cheers, and noticed a funny line in John Ratzenberger's description: "His work for Pixar, as well as parts in ‘Superman’ and ‘The Empire Strikes Back’ make Ratzenberger the sixth most successful actor of all time."

It was so strange to me, I googled "Ratzenberger sixth most successful actor", since I have no clue what that even means. The Wikipedia entry that the AP lifted the line from filled in the details: "Ratzenberger's work for Pixar, as well as his parts in Superman and The Empire Strikes Back, makes him the 6th most successful actor of all time, as measured by a total box office of over $3,000,000,000."

What a joke.

09:43 am - Le Sigh

You can always count on the Boston Globe and enterprising historians to just make crap up: What did the Founders argue about? Healthcare.

By the way, on a totally unrelated note, if you don't know about the Depression of 1920, you should be asking yourself why that is.

10:16 pm - Capitalism Isn't The Problem, Part 254324263784

Corporatist Pigs!:

Consider Philadelphia's failed attempt to "privatize" education. The city hired the services of a supposedly private corporation called Edison to oversee it. All the schools were taken over by Edison and the city paid it to manage them.

With no competition in sight and a guarantee of payment by the government regardless of performance, Edison's operation was completely inefficient, and it promptly failed.

The proponents of public education were ecstatic. They could say to the world, "See — we're open-minded. We tried using the market to educate children and it failed; capitalism failed." Wrong! Capitalism didn't fail; corporatism failed.

Capitalism works when government stays out of the way completely. In a free market, prices go down and quality goes up. Why? Because private companies are competing with one another for your dollars.

The rationale behind "privatizing" education is that it would introduce the element of competition. Schools would not hold a monopoly in their districts and would not be guaranteed students. Therefore, they would have to improve education levels to attract their students. Replacing a government monopoly with a government-sanctioned corporate monopoly simply transfers the bureaucratic inefficiency and corruption from one entity to another.

. . .

Whether we are discussing farm subsidies, bailouts, corporate favoritism, or licenses and privileges given to certain companies, we are in fact seeing the myriad ways that government has reared its head into the markets. Government and corporations invent scheme after scheme to ensure the superficial appearance of free enterprise, line the pockets of each, and shield the government from any blame.

These market interventions create all-powerful corporations, which are seen as capitalist greed at its worst.

08:59 pm - Scumbags

The socialist-corporate oligarchy has become institutionalized within the American System, and all Main Street can do is elect presidents who further enrich the evil institution and call it “security” (Bush) or “change” (Obama). And the Federal Reserve overlords call it a path to “prosperity” for the middle class.

If you still think we're fighting about capitalism vs. socialism or conservatism vs. liberalism, you need to wake up fast. If it's going to be liberty vs. tyranny, we'd better figure it out before the battle is over.

The scumbags have infiltrated both public and private sectors, and they're sharing power. They're playing us for fools.

05:24 pm - The Times They Are A-Changin'

Krugman and Romer are saying basically the same thing. The field of economics has taken a wrong turn. Enter kook Gary North, who outlines a surefire path for an ambitious young economist to eventually be credited as the brilliant revolutionary.

07:44 pm - Los Estados Unidos Are

“The United States Are,” “The United States Is,” and the Civil War offers a good reason to be critical of the standard "It was 'the United States are' up until the Civil War, and then it changed to 'is'" line. I'm with the first commenter, it really was better the wrong way.

05:39 pm - Insight of the Day

Ted Dziuba: "I won't hire someone who doesn't code in their free time" is Siliconvallese for "I don't want to hire any grownups because they remind me of my parents".

06:24 pm - $20

You can get almost anything by slipping a $20 bill to the right person, provided you have the cojones. It makes the twenty, also known as the yuppie food stamp, the most useful of all bills.

10:11 pm - Afghanistan

There's some controversy around what we should do about Afghanistan. Odds are better than even that you, like an overwhelming majority of Americans, are not well enough informed to have much of an opinion on the matter. Since early 2002, you've had to really go far out of your way to find good reporting on the war and regional developments more broadly, so it's hardly a fault.

I found these two recent pieces extremely helpful, and recommend them to anybody seeking perspective on Afghanistan: Analysis: Al Qaeda is the tip of the jihadist spear and Pakistan warns India to 'back off'

07:33 pm - Be Happy

Everybody, stop whatever you're doing and look at these pretty pictures of Autumn.

08:17 pm - The Goods

As a general rule, the Court is limited by political constraints and the justices rarely act to protect individual rights or limit government power in cases where the political branches and majority public opinion are against it. The very best Supreme Court decisions tend to be exceptions to this pattern. I guess so, but mostly because those are the most memorable, for obvious reasons.

Scalia: ‘We Are Devoting Too Many of Our Best Minds to’ Lawyering Yeah, but I'm not sure they'd otherwise be doing more useful things.

Meekness, which is the virtue that moderates anger, is misunderstood as passivity. Moses angrily confronting Pharaoh was the meekest of men, because he moderated the plagues to allow Pharaoh time to repent. Meekness moderates anger so that it is in accord with reason. Since most people suffer from an excess of anger, the virtue that increases anger in those who are deficient in it so that it is in accord with reason does not have a name, but it needs one. Anger isn't always sinful.

The Problem With Science Is Scientists is, in my experience, a true observation.

Demand for Money and Supply of Money educated me a little.

And, finally, Denninger's crazy old self gets it again: It is time to identify that which is an exercise in capitalism, and that which is an exercise in fraud.

07:44 pm - The End

“The Catastrophe” - Part 1: What the End of Bronze-Age Civilization Means for Modern Times

“The Catastrophe” - Part 2: What the End of Bronze-Age Civilization means for Modern Times

06:46 pm - Shorting the Frauds

Tim Knight nailed it:

The reason capitalism - real capitalism - not fraud and artifice - has always appealed to me is because it most closely resembled the natural order of things; that is: the truth. And I've got a familiarity with the truth that some people find disquieting. I'm kind of a big fan of it.

. . .

I'm not interested in shorting AAPL or GOOG, not only because their charts simply aren't that opportune (even in the face of a severe leg down), but also because, by and large, these companies represent capitalism at its best. That's also probably why they charts don't look like good shorts.

. . .

My point is that government money, funneled through Goldman Sachs, can - and has - created artificial demand for equities that have sent them soaring. The government's printing presses are big enough to "buy" the market. But even the government can't fake widespread corporate prosperity, and for that reason, sooner or later, this game is going to reach its ugly conclusion.

06:48 pm - Different Take on Obama

Here's a different take on Obama than any I've seen so far, Half a president by Steve McCann:

In the United Kingdom and many other countries with a parliamentary system there is a distinction between the head of state and the head of the government. In some countries such as Denmark, Spain and the United Kingdom the monarch either a King or Queen is considered the head of state and with that office goes all the trappings of royalty. The mundane responsibility of running the government falls to the elected Parliament and their chosen Prime Minister.

Of the world's major democracies only the United States merges both functions into the office of President.

It appears that Barack Obama views himself as the head of state only. As such he cannot be bothered with the day to day responsibility of governance. He is, in his narcissistic world, above all that; thus he delegates the writing of the Stimulus, health care and other major bills to Nancy Pelosi, puts off any decisions on Iran and Afghanistan, appoints czars with power to spend and set policy and prefers to spend his time on television speaking to the huddled masses.

His responsibilities as the head of government have been assigned to others, who in many cases are not answerable to the American people. This has created untold chaos in Congress and apprehension among the citizenry. Yet the President appears not to care, as his interests lie elsewhere.

The Presidency of the United States to Mr. Obama is nothing more than a stage so he, pre-ordained by destiny, can act as head of state for the world.

06:51 pm - No Taxes!

47% will pay no federal income tax. It should be abundantly clear why this threatens the health of our republic. And it gets worse: "when considering federal income taxes in combination with payroll taxes, the percent of households with a net liability of zero or less is estimated to be 24%"

The article goes on to describe how a progressive taxation system works in extremely misleading terms:

A key reason why there is a zero-liability group at all is because the U.S. tax system is progressive. Those who bring in more money pay more than those lower down the income scale to support government functions such as national defense and social safety nets like Medicaid for those in need. That progressivity can be dialed up or down.

01:42 pm - Le Blog: 2010 Lincoln Cent

I'm getting back into life again, so that means New Blog Post: this one's about possible 2010 Lincoln Cent designs, mostly just an excuse to post images of the designs so that when they choose the ugliest possible one, you'll know what could have been.

11:26 am - Amendment One

I believe in freedom of speech, something that much of the world (look at Europe and the Middle East for two very different examples) does not seem to value so highly. The freedom to express myself as I choose, believe as I do, and live as I choose, is something I am firmly unwilling to compromise.

There has been talk at the UN for some time now, spearheaded by Muslims, about restricting free speech internationally. The notion that your considering my speech hateful disqualifies me from the right to say it, that you finding my beliefs repugnant disqualifies me from the right to hold them, is beyond reprehensible. That is why things like this, from Eugene Volokh, worry me very much: Is the Obama Administration Supporting Calls to Outlaw Supposed Hate Speech?:

That's what it looks like, with this Joint U.S./Egypt draft U.N. Human Rights Council resolution (dated Sept. 2005). The resolution generally seems to be an attempt to urge more protection for free speech throughout the world, and some praise it for that; moreover, it lacks the exception for "defamation of religion" that some Muslim countries have urged. It may therefore be a step forward for Egypt, and an attempt to urge a step forward for some other countries.

But I'm worried that it might be a step backward for our own constitutional rights, because of what seems to be the U.S. endorsement of the suppression of "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence" and possibly of "negative stereotyping of religions and racial groups." I say "seems to be" because some of the language in the resolution is pretty slippery, and of course it's always possible that I'm misunderstanding it.