Monthly Archive for February, 2008

Page 3 of 3

How Many Euphemisms Are There For “Theft”?

Posted on February 3, 2008, 11:36 pm. Closed

Clinton health plan may mean tapping pay:

WASHINGTON – Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.

The New York senator has criticized presidential rival Barack Obama for pushing a health plan that would not require universal coverage. Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would embrace, but when pressed on ABC’s “This Week,” she said: “I think there are a number of mechanisms” that are possible, including “going after people’s wages, automatic enrollment.”

Clinton said such measures would apply only to workers who can afford health coverage but refuse to buy it, which puts undue pressure on hospitals and emergency rooms. With her proposals for subsidies, she said, “it will be affordable for everyone.”

Of course it will be affordable for everyone, especially when you STEAL from the most productive citizens and when you STRIP their liberties from them. These Dems make the silliest fuss about how our government should not be “spying” on us, how we should not be in this stupid war in Iraq, about how we shouldn’t sacrifice our freedoms for security, yet they go on to say in the same goddamn breath that we should sacrifice our freedoms so everyone can have cheap health care, which is a form security and wellbeing.

To me, the biggest difference in the government doing what it thinks it needs to do to protect us from terrorists and the government doing what it thinks it needs to do to give us cheap health care is that people are largely incapable of insulating themselves from the threat of terrorists. I can’t collect foreign intelligence, I can’t tell the State or Defense Departments to work whatever magic they might have. I am extremely dependent on this government to protect me from military threats, whereas I and other people are less dependent on the government in regards to health care.

Has any of these Dems explained why taking away freedoms and liberties for cheap health care better than taking away freedoms and liberties in order to kill terrorists before they kill me?

Problem With the Concensus Views About China

Posted on February 3, 2008, 8:51 am. Closed

I just watched a very interesting presentation (and relatively short at about 27 minutes) by Dr. H. “Woody” Brock, President of Strategic Economic Decisions, about the threat of  China and the 5 general misconceptions of concensus views.

Here are the 5 questions Brock poses regarding the concensus views of China:

  • Is it true that a higher yuan would not improve the US trade deficit?
  • Do those who celebrate the virtues of “cheap Chinese imports now” not understand there is no free lunch?
  • Who says the very low US savings rate is in fact the principal reason for the vast US trade deficit?
  • Is it true that the Chinese will retaliate by “pulling out their money” and/or by reducing their ongoing purchases of US treasuries?
  • On what grounds is the yuan “only” undervalued by 15%-25%?

Brock addresses each of his questions in language that is easy to understand. Non-economists should be able to wrap their minds around the concepts which Brock discusses. 

In conclusion, Brock attempts to answer what should be done about China using the paradigm of game theory. There are three factors that influences the outcome of bargaining between China and the U.S.: (1) the relative risk aversion of the bargaining nation, (2) the relative threat power, and (3) the relative coalitional muscle. Brock essentially says that although the U.S. in theory has the upper hand on two of these three factors, he is worried that the U.S. is incapable of capitalizing on its strengths in order to bargain successfully with China. Brock is worried about the future of the U.S. in relation to China and Asia.

Though I think everyone has heard of “the Chinese threat” or some such variation on that phrase, most don’t really understand the nature of the threat, which is largely economic in nature, though there is a growing military threat. This presentation does a good job providing some simplified concensus views of China and also his arguments that the concensus views are wrong. Watching this will help you understand better the nature of the threat from China.

Pine Mountain Challenge

Posted on February 2, 2008, 7:40 pm. Closed

Today was the Pine Mountain Challenge, a 128 mile ride starting at Gordon College in Barnesville and going to the top of Pine Mountain and back. The goal this year was to do the ride in 6.5 hours; we did it in about 6 hours, averaging 20.8 mph.

The ride started off a little chillier than I expected, but the weather was excellent the whole way through. Lots of sunshine. I was in some difficulty at one moment in the first half of the ride due to some people deciding to go way too fast, but I was able to stay on. But asides from that one difficult point, I rode very well and participated in an extremely fast rotation during the second half of the ride.

This fast rotation was comprised of myself and seven others going 24-28 mph for about 20-30 minutes. This was a very hard effort to say the least and two of my friends had to drop out of the rotation in order to just hang on to the back. This was a wise decision for them, else they might have been dropped if they tried to beat themselves up.

So the ride was excellent, my legs are tired, and I think it’s now time to grab a beer or three from the fridge.

Merrill to Repay Massachusetts City for CDO Purchase

Posted on February 1, 2008, 5:24 pm. Closed

Merrill to Repay Massachusetts City for CDO Purchase:

Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) — Merrill Lynch & Co. agreed to pay Springfield, Massachusetts, $13.9 million to settle a dispute over collateralized debt obligations that tumbled in value.

The money will reimburse Springfield for the cost of the CDOs, securities tied to home loans and other debts shunned by investors as losses on subprime mortgages mounted. New York-based Merrill said it agreed to the refund after discovering its brokers bought the CDOs without the city’s “express permission.”

The money will reimburse Springfield for the cost of the CDOs, securities tied to home loans and other debts shunned by investors as losses on subprime mortgages mounted. New York-based Merrill said it agreed to the refund after discovering the purchase was made without the city’s consent.

How nice of them, considering the purchase was made without the city’s consent.