Turned 50 this year!
This blog has been left someone underused these days. But I've decided to recognize leaving the 40-something life with a new template and color scheme.
Hope to write here occasionally!
Politics: Syria giving up chemical weapons - practical realities
On paper the idea of Syria's Assad giving up their chemical weapons to UN inspectors sounds great but there are some possible practical problems - they can get moved and hidden (as indicated in CNN report below which may or may not turn out to be correct) and, of course, Syria is an active war zone so sending UN inspectors to go inventory them and supervise their neutralization is easier said than done. And finally, Syria is a client state of Russia. Thus, with one hand the Russians can say to Syria give up your chemical weapon stocks (seriously or with a wink) and, on the other hand, give them more conventional weapons to continue the war with the rebels.
Syria may be moving chemical weapons into Lebanon and Iraq.
Syria may be moving chemical weapons into Lebanon and Iraq.
Money: What would Jim Cramer think?
Am not a financial analyst but I do try pick some stocks along with leaving a good portion to the "index ETFs" so I don't have to think too hard.
Currently, have long positions in these 4 companies:
Verizon (VZ) - Wireless is huge and will keep getting bigger. Of the 4 biggies in the USA (Verizon, ATT, T-Mobile, Sprint), I went with VZ because its a big Dow30 stock with solid dividends. I've been surprised at the run up in the price since I picked it up a while back so does that make this a growth stock?
Disclaimer: I use ATT Wireless because I signed up with them eons ago and am too lazy to change. Also, since I do travel to Europe occasionally, Verizon's CDMA phones probably don't work in GSM Europe. But many of my friends like their Verizon cell phones because of good coverage in a wide range of locations.
Whole Foods (WFM) - With the increasing health consciousness of Americans, WFM is positioned for growth. Also, I like CEO John Mackey's free market perspective. And finally, by all accounts, the company treats the employees well and they provide good responsible products.
Disclaimer: I do shop at WFM as well as Trader Joes and Sprouts and Ralphs and I'm not vegan or vegetarian but am trying to be more health conscious about what I eat and also how its produced.
Time Warner Cable (TWC) - Its a risk I admit but I think their aggressive moves to lock up LA Lakers and LA Dodgers and LA Galaxy to form Time Warner Sports Channel will boost them.
Disclaimer: I am a subscriber to TWC because they are the only service where I live. So far I have been pleased with their cable TV and broadband internet.
Union Pacific (UNP) - Sometimes, you just got to buy the big dog in the industry. Of the US rail companies (UNP, CSX, NSC, KSU), UNP has the most total revenue. Rail isn't a glamourous business but they move a lot of goods and materials around the country.
Would these pass Cramer's critical eye?
Currently, have long positions in these 4 companies:
Verizon (VZ) - Wireless is huge and will keep getting bigger. Of the 4 biggies in the USA (Verizon, ATT, T-Mobile, Sprint), I went with VZ because its a big Dow30 stock with solid dividends. I've been surprised at the run up in the price since I picked it up a while back so does that make this a growth stock?
Disclaimer: I use ATT Wireless because I signed up with them eons ago and am too lazy to change. Also, since I do travel to Europe occasionally, Verizon's CDMA phones probably don't work in GSM Europe. But many of my friends like their Verizon cell phones because of good coverage in a wide range of locations.
Whole Foods (WFM) - With the increasing health consciousness of Americans, WFM is positioned for growth. Also, I like CEO John Mackey's free market perspective. And finally, by all accounts, the company treats the employees well and they provide good responsible products.
Disclaimer: I do shop at WFM as well as Trader Joes and Sprouts and Ralphs and I'm not vegan or vegetarian but am trying to be more health conscious about what I eat and also how its produced.
Time Warner Cable (TWC) - Its a risk I admit but I think their aggressive moves to lock up LA Lakers and LA Dodgers and LA Galaxy to form Time Warner Sports Channel will boost them.
Disclaimer: I am a subscriber to TWC because they are the only service where I live. So far I have been pleased with their cable TV and broadband internet.
Union Pacific (UNP) - Sometimes, you just got to buy the big dog in the industry. Of the US rail companies (UNP, CSX, NSC, KSU), UNP has the most total revenue. Rail isn't a glamourous business but they move a lot of goods and materials around the country.
Would these pass Cramer's critical eye?
News: Politics of coverage
Time now Wednesday 10:04AM PDT.
Just checked ABCnews.com, NBCnews.com, CBSnews.com, CNN.com, Foxnews.com ...
Four of the five news sites have the Ohio kidnap story as the main story. I define main as big fonts with prominent photo at the top of the web page.
One news site has the Benghazi hearings as the main story.
The other four that have the Ohio story prominent do have "watch live" links.
What does this say about the editorial decisions at the major news sites?
Four of the five news sites have the Ohio kidnap story as the main story. I define main as big fonts with prominent photo at the top of the web page.
One news site has the Benghazi hearings as the main story.
The other four that have the Ohio story prominent do have "watch live" links.
What does this say about the editorial decisions at the major news sites?
Faith: Elder Ordination
Had the honor and duty to be ordained as an elder in the PCUSA last Sunday, April 7, 2013. I'll be serving as the clerk of our session (the governing council in our church). I was moved as it sank in that I was stepping into a stream that has been flowing for 2000+ years when Jesus inaugurated the church. As part of the ordination, the following questions are asked and answered:
a. Do you trust in Jesus Christ your Savior, acknowledge him Lord of all and Head of the Church, and through him believe in one God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
b. Do you accept the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be, by the Holy Spirit, the unique and authoritative witness to Jesus Christ in the Church universal, and God’s Word to you?
c. Do you sincerely receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith as expressed in the confessions of our church as authentic and reliable expositions of what Scripture leads us to believe and do, and will you be instructed and led by those confessions as you lead the people of God?
d. Will you fulfill your office in obedience to Jesus Christ, under the authority of Scripture, and be continually guided by our confessions?
e. Will you be governed by our church’s polity, and will you abide by its discipline? Will you be a friend among your colleagues in ministry, working with them, subject to the ordering of God’s Word and Spirit?
f. Will you in your own life seek to follow the Lord Jesus Christ, love your neighbors, and work for the reconciliation of the world?
g. Do you promise to further the peace, unity, and purity of the church?
h. Will you seek to serve the people with energy, intelligence, imagination, and love?
i. Will you be a faithful elder, watching over the people, providing for their worship, nurture, and service?
j. Will you share in government and discipline, serving in governing bodies of the church, and in your ministry will you try to show the love and justice of Jesus Christ?
a. Do you trust in Jesus Christ your Savior, acknowledge him Lord of all and Head of the Church, and through him believe in one God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
b. Do you accept the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be, by the Holy Spirit, the unique and authoritative witness to Jesus Christ in the Church universal, and God’s Word to you?
c. Do you sincerely receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith as expressed in the confessions of our church as authentic and reliable expositions of what Scripture leads us to believe and do, and will you be instructed and led by those confessions as you lead the people of God?
d. Will you fulfill your office in obedience to Jesus Christ, under the authority of Scripture, and be continually guided by our confessions?
e. Will you be governed by our church’s polity, and will you abide by its discipline? Will you be a friend among your colleagues in ministry, working with them, subject to the ordering of God’s Word and Spirit?
f. Will you in your own life seek to follow the Lord Jesus Christ, love your neighbors, and work for the reconciliation of the world?
g. Do you promise to further the peace, unity, and purity of the church?
h. Will you seek to serve the people with energy, intelligence, imagination, and love?
i. Will you be a faithful elder, watching over the people, providing for their worship, nurture, and service?
j. Will you share in government and discipline, serving in governing bodies of the church, and in your ministry will you try to show the love and justice of Jesus Christ?
Faith: Rule of Benedict 4
#ruleofbenedict 4: good works come from loving God and othes above self, realizing time is short and trusting in God's mercy
Sports: Looking back on the 3 Final Four runs of UCLA under Howland
Three Final Fours (2006-2008) and Coach Howland was viewed as having a job for life at UCLA.
Well, things went downhill rapidly and by 2013, he was fired.
Those three great runs were of course fueled by talented players who have made for themselves a place in the NBA and by Coach Howland's emphasis on strong man-to-man defense. Of course, some fans second guessed that he didn't allow the team more freedom on offense which may or may not have kept them from the NCAA Championship.
The reality, looking back, is that the difference between victory and defeat is often very slim and UCLA and Howland's fortunes could have been much less.
Turn the clock back to 2006 and what basketball fan will every forget the epic collapse (if you are a Gonzaga fan) or comeback (if you are a UCLA fan) in the regional semi-finals? That first Final Four and Championship game appearance could easily have ended as a "mere" Sweet 16 finish.
In 2008, UCLA was down for almost the whole game against Texas A& M in the 2nd round. UCLA took the lead with hardly any time left. A&M had the final possession to tie the game and their guard drove to the basket but missed in what replays would later show was lots of contact where a foul could easily have been called. Perhaps, he would have missed one or two of the free throws or UCLA would have won in overtime but the game remains one of the more controversial "no calls" in NCAA Tournament history. Thus, the 2008 Final Four run with Kevin Love and Russell Westbrook and Aaron Afflalo could have ended ignominiously in the second round.
Am pretty surch Coach Howland will find a new place to coach and get a fresh start with a new fan base. And hopefully, Coach Alford will be able to grow further as a coach and bring UCLA back to competitiveness.
Fans had hoped for a bigger name coach but I think UCLA hasn't gotten a big name coach since Larry Brown.
Coaches since Brown:
Larry Farmer - prior assistant coach experience with the UCLA job being his first head coaching position
Walt Hazzard - UCLA job first head coach position
Jim Harrick - UCLA job was second head coach position after modest success at Pepperdine
Steve Lavin - UCLA job first head coach position with prior assistant coaching jobs
Ben Howland - successful head coach at Northern Arizona and Pittsburgh prior to leading UCLA
Steve Alford - some successes as head coach of Southwest Missouri State, Iowa and New Mexico before coming to UCLA.
Well, things went downhill rapidly and by 2013, he was fired.
Those three great runs were of course fueled by talented players who have made for themselves a place in the NBA and by Coach Howland's emphasis on strong man-to-man defense. Of course, some fans second guessed that he didn't allow the team more freedom on offense which may or may not have kept them from the NCAA Championship.
The reality, looking back, is that the difference between victory and defeat is often very slim and UCLA and Howland's fortunes could have been much less.
Turn the clock back to 2006 and what basketball fan will every forget the epic collapse (if you are a Gonzaga fan) or comeback (if you are a UCLA fan) in the regional semi-finals? That first Final Four and Championship game appearance could easily have ended as a "mere" Sweet 16 finish.
In 2008, UCLA was down for almost the whole game against Texas A& M in the 2nd round. UCLA took the lead with hardly any time left. A&M had the final possession to tie the game and their guard drove to the basket but missed in what replays would later show was lots of contact where a foul could easily have been called. Perhaps, he would have missed one or two of the free throws or UCLA would have won in overtime but the game remains one of the more controversial "no calls" in NCAA Tournament history. Thus, the 2008 Final Four run with Kevin Love and Russell Westbrook and Aaron Afflalo could have ended ignominiously in the second round.
Am pretty surch Coach Howland will find a new place to coach and get a fresh start with a new fan base. And hopefully, Coach Alford will be able to grow further as a coach and bring UCLA back to competitiveness.
Fans had hoped for a bigger name coach but I think UCLA hasn't gotten a big name coach since Larry Brown.
Coaches since Brown:
Larry Farmer - prior assistant coach experience with the UCLA job being his first head coaching position
Walt Hazzard - UCLA job first head coach position
Jim Harrick - UCLA job was second head coach position after modest success at Pepperdine
Steve Lavin - UCLA job first head coach position with prior assistant coaching jobs
Ben Howland - successful head coach at Northern Arizona and Pittsburgh prior to leading UCLA
Steve Alford - some successes as head coach of Southwest Missouri State, Iowa and New Mexico before coming to UCLA.
Faith: Rule of Benedict 3
#ruleofbenedict 3: good decision making requires listening of and respect for all involved
Faith: Rule of Benedict 2
#ruleofbenedict 2: a leader knows they answer to God, seeks the well being of group, teaches by example, adapts to each person
Faith: Rule of Benedict 1
#ruleofbenedict 1: commit to a community that has expectations upon its members
Faith: The Rule of Saint Benedict for the Twitter Age?
The rule is the guide by which a particular community lives. For example, you can read about the Rule of St. Francis that guide the Franciscan friars or the Carmelite Rule of St. Albert. The Rule of Benedict has been translated into English and can be found in various printed editions and in many languages online. I found the edition pictured above in the library and am reading through it now. What I'll attempt to do is summarize the "rules" in Twitter sized bites. I wonder how St. Benedict would react to such an idea? In any case, I hope some of the ancient wisdom will be helpful for us 21st century folks!
To monitor the progress of this series of posts look here under the label rule of benedict or at my Twitter @a4theroad #ruleofbenedict
Sport: UCLA vs. Minnesota
Everyone is saying UCLA will lose even though they are a "6" playing an "11."
There are good reasons:
1) Jordan Adams was injured at the end of the Pac12 semi-final and needed surgery on his foot and is out for the rest of the season. His scoring and crafty steals were a big part of the success of this year's Bruins and were sorely missed in the defeat against Oregon in the Pac12 finals.
2) Rumors swirl around the impending firing of Coach Howland.
3) And now, a report surfaced that Shabazz is actually one year older than he has been claiming furthering the circus atmosphere around the burning ship that is the Bruin's basketball program.
Keys to tonights game:
1. First 5 minutes - if the team is in disarray they will be down double digits and they will either fold or be in a hole too big to dig out of.
They got off to a slow start.
2. Shabazz maybe the star but Larry Drew II is the key. His leadership keeps the team calm and he can pick his moments to score.
Neither had a good game.
3. Ware twins need to hit the open shots since the defense is going to key in on Shabazz.
10 and 4 points from them was not enough.
4. Shabazz needs to play within the flow of the game taking it to the hoop when he gets the chance but also giving up the ball when they close in on him.
Poor shooting until later in the game.
5. Anderson will get his points but UCLA really needs him to get rebounds to keep UCLA in the game since Minnesota is a rebounding monster.
Led Bruins with 11 rebounds but only 6 points.
6. Powell needs to be a defensive stopper. Bruins have scorers in others but need someone to be a pest to Minnesota's offense.
5 steals!
7. Look for Parker to get some minutes as they need his big body to deal with Minnesota's size. If he can give 12 effective minutes UCLA has a shot.
7 minutes, 5 fouls but 9 points.
8. Be alert to the officiating. UCLA has too few players to be playing with foul trouble.
T. Ware 4 fouls, T. Parker 5 fouls.
9. Howland needs to be smart in substitutions to sneak rest for his players.
The team was in a daze.
10. Will it be UCLA's defense on the last possession that preserves the win or UCLA's offense that gets the last bucket lifting them to victory?
If the Bruins had most of the 9 above keys, they win. As it was, they had almost none of the 9 and were blown out. Howland was fired on Sunday.
UCLA 69 Minnesota 68.
GO BRUINS!
There are good reasons:
1) Jordan Adams was injured at the end of the Pac12 semi-final and needed surgery on his foot and is out for the rest of the season. His scoring and crafty steals were a big part of the success of this year's Bruins and were sorely missed in the defeat against Oregon in the Pac12 finals.
2) Rumors swirl around the impending firing of Coach Howland.
3) And now, a report surfaced that Shabazz is actually one year older than he has been claiming furthering the circus atmosphere around the burning ship that is the Bruin's basketball program.
Keys to tonights game:
1. First 5 minutes - if the team is in disarray they will be down double digits and they will either fold or be in a hole too big to dig out of.
They got off to a slow start.
2. Shabazz maybe the star but Larry Drew II is the key. His leadership keeps the team calm and he can pick his moments to score.
Neither had a good game.
3. Ware twins need to hit the open shots since the defense is going to key in on Shabazz.
10 and 4 points from them was not enough.
4. Shabazz needs to play within the flow of the game taking it to the hoop when he gets the chance but also giving up the ball when they close in on him.
Poor shooting until later in the game.
5. Anderson will get his points but UCLA really needs him to get rebounds to keep UCLA in the game since Minnesota is a rebounding monster.
Led Bruins with 11 rebounds but only 6 points.
6. Powell needs to be a defensive stopper. Bruins have scorers in others but need someone to be a pest to Minnesota's offense.
5 steals!
7. Look for Parker to get some minutes as they need his big body to deal with Minnesota's size. If he can give 12 effective minutes UCLA has a shot.
7 minutes, 5 fouls but 9 points.
8. Be alert to the officiating. UCLA has too few players to be playing with foul trouble.
T. Ware 4 fouls, T. Parker 5 fouls.
9. Howland needs to be smart in substitutions to sneak rest for his players.
The team was in a daze.
10. Will it be UCLA's defense on the last possession that preserves the win or UCLA's offense that gets the last bucket lifting them to victory?
If the Bruins had most of the 9 above keys, they win. As it was, they had almost none of the 9 and were blown out. Howland was fired on Sunday.
UCLA 69 Minnesota 68.
GO BRUINS!
Faith: What to make of those strange laws in Leviticus?
I'm guessing I'm pretty late to seeing this widely circulated email:
As for my quick response here in this blog space, I'll offer a disclaimer that I am not a scholar of the Hebrew Scriptures nor a Christian theologian by trade. Nonetheless, I try to think through these issues at some limited level since I belive in the Christian worldview and trust Scripture as a valuable and valid source for wisdom. One pastor I heard offered this explanation that maybe helpful; the Levitical laws fall into three broad categories: moral, civil and ceremonial.
Ceremonial laws apply only to Jewish religious rituals and thus they are not binding on anyone outside that context. Some of these rules may sound arbitrary but in the context of religious ritual they served some purpose.
Civil laws govern daily life in the nation of Israel of which some may still be useful today and some not useful. Some of these laws may have been given by God to help the Jewish people separate themselves from their neighbors and thus sound rather arbitrary to us today.
Moral laws would apply to all societies at all times. Of course, many people today don't believe there are moral absolutes but that is an entirely separate conversation.
Thus, though the initial reaction that those laws seem absurd is reasonable, a closer look probably puts many of them in a different light.
Dear (name removed) the WISE ONE,This reminded me of a scene in West Wing which is embedded in this blog post over at STR. There is a video response by STR's Alan Shlemon. Shlemon's key point was that these laws need to be understood in their historical and religious context and its worth a click through if you are interested in the subject.
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you and will try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I will simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of debate. However (name removed), I do need some advice from you, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? I don't want to get ripped off !
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them or ask the Lord to do this?
5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10 , it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?
7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27 . How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
(Name removed), I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help me.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Your adoring fan. (Name Removed)
As for my quick response here in this blog space, I'll offer a disclaimer that I am not a scholar of the Hebrew Scriptures nor a Christian theologian by trade. Nonetheless, I try to think through these issues at some limited level since I belive in the Christian worldview and trust Scripture as a valuable and valid source for wisdom. One pastor I heard offered this explanation that maybe helpful; the Levitical laws fall into three broad categories: moral, civil and ceremonial.
Ceremonial laws apply only to Jewish religious rituals and thus they are not binding on anyone outside that context. Some of these rules may sound arbitrary but in the context of religious ritual they served some purpose.
Civil laws govern daily life in the nation of Israel of which some may still be useful today and some not useful. Some of these laws may have been given by God to help the Jewish people separate themselves from their neighbors and thus sound rather arbitrary to us today.
Moral laws would apply to all societies at all times. Of course, many people today don't believe there are moral absolutes but that is an entirely separate conversation.
Thus, though the initial reaction that those laws seem absurd is reasonable, a closer look probably puts many of them in a different light.
Faith: Christianity today in the USA - some thoughts on the current scene inside and outside the PCUSA
1. The PCUSA (the church I currently belong to is part of the PCUSA) has a lot going for it conceptually.
Most of my church life has been in congregational ruled churches and I have friends mostly in those settings as well. There is good and bad to congregational rulership of churches. The bad is that sometimes there can be a "cult of personality" which can be very unhealthy so the oversight and accountability structures of the PCUSA are noble and wise. I have seen those mechanisms used effectively to help a PCUSA church I was a part of get back on its feet after a season of conflict within its leadership team.
2. PCUSA as an entity is deeply divided.
I have heard those rumblings back in 1998 when I first started to attend a PCUSA church and because of the growing troubles in the denomination nationally, the thought of leaving PCUSA has occurred often. The Church (big C) will survive because it is God's instrument but PCUSA itself is not sacred. I had heard in some preaching somewhere that the 7 churches in the book of Revelation all eventually faded away? Thus, a particular local body or a national denomination has no assurance of survival.
3. I think the problems within the PCUSA are reflected in the church at large in the USA.
4. I affirm the emergent church's hunger for doing church differently but acknowledge that just because something is new doesn't mean its a good idea and that because something is old it is a bad idea.
5. I affirm that orthopraxy is very important but acknowledge that the Scriptures do make theological claims.
6. I affirm that orthodoxy is a very important but acknowledge that some people (me included?) put a lot of (too many) bullet points on their orthodoxy list.
7. I affirm post-modernism's concern that interpretation of Scripture can be fraught with mistakes but acknowledge that we can't really function if we have no fixed anchor points.
If we believe everything we really are committed to nothing.
8. We want to identify with our culture and welcome everyone with open hearts and wide arms.
See life of Jesus in the Gospels.
9. Yet, Jesus following in some ways is counter-cultural and in some situations, we need to separate ourselves.
Again, see life of Jesus in the Gospels. The in the world but not of the world balance is an incredibly difficult tightrope to walk.
10. Spirit of truth, guide us to truth and Lord have mercy!
Most of my church life has been in congregational ruled churches and I have friends mostly in those settings as well. There is good and bad to congregational rulership of churches. The bad is that sometimes there can be a "cult of personality" which can be very unhealthy so the oversight and accountability structures of the PCUSA are noble and wise. I have seen those mechanisms used effectively to help a PCUSA church I was a part of get back on its feet after a season of conflict within its leadership team.
2. PCUSA as an entity is deeply divided.
I have heard those rumblings back in 1998 when I first started to attend a PCUSA church and because of the growing troubles in the denomination nationally, the thought of leaving PCUSA has occurred often. The Church (big C) will survive because it is God's instrument but PCUSA itself is not sacred. I had heard in some preaching somewhere that the 7 churches in the book of Revelation all eventually faded away? Thus, a particular local body or a national denomination has no assurance of survival.
3. I think the problems within the PCUSA are reflected in the church at large in the USA.
4. I affirm the emergent church's hunger for doing church differently but acknowledge that just because something is new doesn't mean its a good idea and that because something is old it is a bad idea.
5. I affirm that orthopraxy is very important but acknowledge that the Scriptures do make theological claims.
6. I affirm that orthodoxy is a very important but acknowledge that some people (me included?) put a lot of (too many) bullet points on their orthodoxy list.
7. I affirm post-modernism's concern that interpretation of Scripture can be fraught with mistakes but acknowledge that we can't really function if we have no fixed anchor points.
If we believe everything we really are committed to nothing.
8. We want to identify with our culture and welcome everyone with open hearts and wide arms.
See life of Jesus in the Gospels.
9. Yet, Jesus following in some ways is counter-cultural and in some situations, we need to separate ourselves.
Again, see life of Jesus in the Gospels. The in the world but not of the world balance is an incredibly difficult tightrope to walk.
10. Spirit of truth, guide us to truth and Lord have mercy!
Science: GWAS = genome wide association study
As a molecular biologist/biochemist trained in the 20th century, I have to say my head is on a swivel trying to keep up with all the new technology being used in research.
Old school molecular biology and biochemistry techniques are being pushed to new levels made possible by the nanotechnology and computer revolutions. One such implementation is the GWAS, genome wide association study.
The idea is based on the fact that there are genetic variations in the human population. Thus, population X (without disease condition Y) is compared against population Z (with disease condition Y). Do the genetic variants distribute the same in population X and population Z?
For example, let's say there is a gene variant P that exits in 75% of the study population (X + Z). If P is NOT associated with disease condition Y then P should show up in population X and Z at 75%. But, in an extreme example, variant P shows up in 55% of population X and 95% of population Z then you would say variant P is associated with disease Y.
Of course, that is an extreme example and real life the data is much less clear cut. And of course, correlation (or association) is not causation.
Came across this article with the provocative title, Have We Wasted 7 Years and $100 Million Dollars on GWAS Studies?
The author rightly points out the technical challenges of conducting such experiments and the limits of the interpretation of the data. And certainly, it looked bleak for whether it has been worthwhile. But in the end, he concludes, that is science, you got to try and see what happens and that these efforts lay a foundation for future experiments. He summarizes:
Old school molecular biology and biochemistry techniques are being pushed to new levels made possible by the nanotechnology and computer revolutions. One such implementation is the GWAS, genome wide association study.
The idea is based on the fact that there are genetic variations in the human population. Thus, population X (without disease condition Y) is compared against population Z (with disease condition Y). Do the genetic variants distribute the same in population X and population Z?
For example, let's say there is a gene variant P that exits in 75% of the study population (X + Z). If P is NOT associated with disease condition Y then P should show up in population X and Z at 75%. But, in an extreme example, variant P shows up in 55% of population X and 95% of population Z then you would say variant P is associated with disease Y.
Of course, that is an extreme example and real life the data is much less clear cut. And of course, correlation (or association) is not causation.
Came across this article with the provocative title, Have We Wasted 7 Years and $100 Million Dollars on GWAS Studies?
The author rightly points out the technical challenges of conducting such experiments and the limits of the interpretation of the data. And certainly, it looked bleak for whether it has been worthwhile. But in the end, he concludes, that is science, you got to try and see what happens and that these efforts lay a foundation for future experiments. He summarizes:
So has it been worth it to spend over $100 million dollars in research funding on these studies over the past seven years?
Yes.
But not because we discovered lots of actionable genetic markers. We haven’t.
And not because we have achieved a genetic understanding of common (and costly) diseases as we promised in our grants. We haven’t.
But science isn’t about delivering on a business plan.
Science is about discovery; breaking ground on venues of research that were previously entirely uncharted or unknown.
Already, follow-up studies are taking a deeper look at the genomic regions associated with certain traits.
Some of these studies are looking to close the gap of missing heritability by using Next-Generation Sequencing and new hypothesis about the biological architecture of common and chronic diseases.
With the expectation that genetics will play a large role in how clinical practice of medicine approaches preventative and personal care, there is an enormous amount of research left to make an individual’s genome actionable.
I’ll be watching closely.
News: Medal of Honor to Clint Romesha
The incredible story of the battle at COP Keating and the role of Clint Romesha had on that day by Jake Tapper.
The base was attacked from all sides by Taliban early in the morning and nearly overrun. Romesha and his team was able to fight back.
An amazing story of courage under fire.
Valor according to Merriam Webster:
strength of mind or spirit that enables a person to encounter danger with firmness : personal bravery
Of course, Romesha, as have other recent recipients of the Medal of Honor have said, they simply did what they had to do. Romesha said after the ceremony:
"I stand here with mixed emotions of both joy and sadness for me today," he said. "I don't think I'm much different than Medal of Honor recipients Sergeant First Class Petry and former Staff Sergeant Giunta and feeling conflicted with this medal I now wear. But joy comes from recognition for us doing our jobs as soldiers on distant battlefields, but is countered by the constant reminder of the loss of our battle buddies, my battle buddies, my soldiers, my friends." Romesha said he accepted "this tremendous honor on behalf of all soldiers who have served with me that day." "This award is for the eight soldiers that didn't make it and for the rest of the team that fought valiantly and magnificently that day. I will forever be humbled by their bravery, their commitment to service and their loyalty to one another."
The base was attacked from all sides by Taliban early in the morning and nearly overrun. Romesha and his team was able to fight back.
An amazing story of courage under fire.
Valor according to Merriam Webster:
strength of mind or spirit that enables a person to encounter danger with firmness : personal bravery
Of course, Romesha, as have other recent recipients of the Medal of Honor have said, they simply did what they had to do. Romesha said after the ceremony:
"I stand here with mixed emotions of both joy and sadness for me today," he said. "I don't think I'm much different than Medal of Honor recipients Sergeant First Class Petry and former Staff Sergeant Giunta and feeling conflicted with this medal I now wear. But joy comes from recognition for us doing our jobs as soldiers on distant battlefields, but is countered by the constant reminder of the loss of our battle buddies, my battle buddies, my soldiers, my friends." Romesha said he accepted "this tremendous honor on behalf of all soldiers who have served with me that day." "This award is for the eight soldiers that didn't make it and for the rest of the team that fought valiantly and magnificently that day. I will forever be humbled by their bravery, their commitment to service and their loyalty to one another."
Theology: What does Psalm 110:5 mean?
"The Lord is at your right hand;
he will crush kings on the day of his wrath." Psalm 110:5 (TNIV)
I've seen three interpretations of this verse:
(1) The Lord God is at Messiah's right hand; God will crush kings on the day of his wrath.
(2) Lord God, at your right hand is Messiah who will crush kings on the day of his wrath.
(3) Messiah is at God's right hand; Messiah will crush kings on the day of his wrath.
For the kings who get crushed on the day of wrath, it doesn't really matter which of the three is the correct interpretation!
Nonetheless, which interpretation is most likely to be correct and why?
Are there some other interpretive options to consider?
I've seen three interpretations of this verse:
(1) The Lord God is at Messiah's right hand; God will crush kings on the day of his wrath.
(2) Lord God, at your right hand is Messiah who will crush kings on the day of his wrath.
(3) Messiah is at God's right hand; Messiah will crush kings on the day of his wrath.
For the kings who get crushed on the day of wrath, it doesn't really matter which of the three is the correct interpretation!
Nonetheless, which interpretation is most likely to be correct and why?
Are there some other interpretive options to consider?
In memoriam: Kuan-Teh Jeang, 1958-2013
Before I start today’s seminar, I would like to offer some brief remarks in memory of Kuan-Teh Jeang who died last Sunday, January 27 at age 54. I was a post-doctoral fellow in his lab at the NIH from 1993 to 1997 working on the molecular biology of HIV.Remarks by Michael Gottesman at Retrovirology.
This photograph (shown above) is from 2012 when he gave the George Khoury lecture in October. This named lecture was started at the NIH in 1994 to recognize the highest levels of scientific research and to remember Dr. Khoury who was one of the bright stars of the NIH who died much too soon. It should be noted that Teh started his scientific career as a post-doctoral fellow in George Khoury’s lab about 25 years ago. And so giving the lecture was both a tremendous scientific and personal occasion for Teh. Who could have known that three months later another one of NIH’s leading lights would pass away much too soon. Suffice to say, Teh’s scientific accomplishments in the field of the molecular biology of human retroviruses were numerous and are best detailed in official remembrances of his life.
I’ll simply say, it was a tremendous honor to work at the NIH for those four years. Teh was the energetic and tireless leader of our research group dedicated to peeling back what was unknown about HTLV and HIV. On a personal level, since our group was composed of post-docs who came from far and wide from Washington DC, he generously gave personal attention and practical help to us, his incoming post-docs. Those simple kindnesses helped us settle into our lives in and around Bethesda.
May God rest his soul and comfort his wife and three children who remain.
Post at BioMedCentral.
Comment from Journal of the International AIDS Society.
Statement at Cell and Bioscience.
Notice at the NIAID/NIH web site.
As part of the network of lab alumni, I've received notice that two longer recollections will be published at Cell and Bioscience and Journal of Biomedical Sciences. I will link to them when they go live.
UPDATES:
Obituary at Journal of Biomedical Sciences.
In memoriam at Cell and Bioscience.
Editorial item at Cell and Bioscience.
Politics: Reflections of a non-gun person
I do not own a gun. I have never even fired a gun. If I saw a gun on the table, I would leave it alone because I would not know how to check to see if it is loaded or not. If an emergency were in progress and I would need to use a handgun and there was one because a security guard with one was down, I wouldn't know how to remove a trigger lock or anything about how to hold, aim and fire it accurately.
I do think, maybe, I should know these very basic things. But of course, why should I gain those skills if I don't actually purchase a gun. Emotionally, I don't know if I am ready to go there.
The Newtown shooting was horrible and it has made me think about what should we do about guns in America?
According to this article in Huffington Post:
First 911 call was at 9:35 AM
SWAT team arrived at 9:45AM
Shooter confirmed dead at 10:30AM
This item from Middletown Press:
9:35 AM Dispatch, “Sandy Hook School, Caller’s indicated she thinks someone is shooting in the building.”
9:40 AM Dispatch, “Shooter’s apparently still shooting in office area. Dickerson Drive.”
9:53 AM Dispatch, “Newtown’s reporting one suspect down. The building has now been cleared.”
These reports would indicate at some point between 9:45 and 9:53, the shooter shot and killed himself.
Sadly, in 10 to 18 minutes, the shooter killed 26 people at the school.
Just a couple of weeks ago, a Georgia mother shot and wounded a crowbar wielding intruder while talking with 911 while barricaded in her attic with her two small children waiting for the police to arrive.
The sad reality in these two situations is that the police could not get there fast enough. In the second case, the woman did have a handgun and knew how to use it.
How does one design gun laws to diminish the chance someone mentally unstable or individual with criminal intent will get firearms?
Will any of the laws being proposed accomplish this?
I suppose background checks should help.
Setting up an electronic background check database in a country with over 300 million people is easy to say in a political speech but probably not a trivial IT exercise. However, with enough computer software programers working on the database and networking specialists to get different government agency computers talking to each other, it could probably be done in a handful of years.
An effective database would make it more difficult for the mentally ill or criminals to obtain weapons through legal sales. Of course, they could go ahead and buy them from illegal sources but let's not make it easy for them by allowing them to just walk up to the gun shop and get the weapons of their choice. These rules do impose some burden on law abiding citizens but in my mind, what is a few extra forms and maybe even a waiting period?
What about restrictions on types of weapons and ammunition limits?
I wondered, what is the typical handgun the police use?
Google search ...
The Glock.
Excerpts:
in the United States, American police officers were feeling that they were outgunned by criminals. A series of incidents—including an FBI shootout with a couple of psychotic bank robbers in Miami in 1986—persuaded the American cops that the gun they had been using for 75 years, the classic Smith & Wesson .38-caliber revolver, was no longer potent enough. They needed something new. And here came Gaston Glock saying, "I have the pistol of the future, and it addresses exactly what you feel you are lacking." .......... Rather than six rounds, the Glock has 17 rounds in the magazine. Instead of a 12-pound trigger pull, like the traditional revolver, it has a trigger pull of slightly more than 5 pounds. That means that someone who is a mediocre shooter or a bad shooter—as many police officers who don’t practice often enough are—will suddenly become more accurate and be more effective. The gun is much lighter, so that if you’re wearing it on your hip for 8 or 10 hours, it will be more comfortable. The Glock is literally made in a plastic mold as opposed to being assembled from steel. It’s what makes it so light; and what allows the gun to have the large capacity [is that] the plastic is very thin. The Glock is also more durable and will function if it’s not cleaned properly or regularly.
As far as long guns are concerned, the AR-15 has received the most news. And indeed, this item indicated that the Washington DC police department decided to issue them to street officers. I would guess many other police departments have taken similar steps.
Excerpt:
Although the overwhelming majority of D.C. homicides are committed with handguns, criminals have used powerful guns in recent years in some high-profile cases in the Washington area. A team of commando-style robbers carried out a string of bank heists in the District and Maryland in 2004, armed with assault rifles and handguns. At the time, police feared the crimes could be fatal, but the robbers were caught before anyone was seriously hurt. Lanier referenced a 1997 bank robbery in Los Angeles, in which two men armed with AK-47 assault rifles engaged in a shootout with police. Seventeen officers and civilians were injured in the incident, which was captured on videotape. The case set off a debate about the need to better arm police. "They crushed the police," Burke said. "If you were to look at one incident in America that got every single police department to look at their weapons, that's it." Assistant Chief Joshua Ederheimer, who is in charge of the police academy, said officers have been "very well trained." "We want to be prepared to respond to a threat," Ederheimer said. "Hopefully, we'll never have to use them."
I don't know how the gun laws are organized in terms of what types of weapons are allowed to be purchased by regular citizens. As a non-gun person, I would think the broad parameters should be as follows:
(1) Civilians should not be able to buy weapons with police/military specifications unless they go through proper training.
(2) Long guns for hunting purposes would continue but perhaps with limited ammunition magazines. I see no reason why a hunter needs 30 bullet magazines; what the cut-off should be, I don't know.
(3) Long guns for personal protection purposes again with some limits on ammunition magazines; what is an appropriate number?
(4) Hand guns for personal protection purposes with some limits on ammunition magazines; what is an appropriate number?
(5) Some kind of rigorous background checking system.
Will it be effective?
I don't know. The gun-rights side would say that criminals will still be able to get these weapons and even more powerful ones through illegal sources. Sad but true.
How do we combat illegal gun purchases perhaps an even more important issue to address?
I do think, maybe, I should know these very basic things. But of course, why should I gain those skills if I don't actually purchase a gun. Emotionally, I don't know if I am ready to go there.
The Newtown shooting was horrible and it has made me think about what should we do about guns in America?
According to this article in Huffington Post:
First 911 call was at 9:35 AM
SWAT team arrived at 9:45AM
Shooter confirmed dead at 10:30AM
This item from Middletown Press:
9:35 AM Dispatch, “Sandy Hook School, Caller’s indicated she thinks someone is shooting in the building.”
9:40 AM Dispatch, “Shooter’s apparently still shooting in office area. Dickerson Drive.”
9:53 AM Dispatch, “Newtown’s reporting one suspect down. The building has now been cleared.”
These reports would indicate at some point between 9:45 and 9:53, the shooter shot and killed himself.
Sadly, in 10 to 18 minutes, the shooter killed 26 people at the school.
Just a couple of weeks ago, a Georgia mother shot and wounded a crowbar wielding intruder while talking with 911 while barricaded in her attic with her two small children waiting for the police to arrive.
The sad reality in these two situations is that the police could not get there fast enough. In the second case, the woman did have a handgun and knew how to use it.
How does one design gun laws to diminish the chance someone mentally unstable or individual with criminal intent will get firearms?
Will any of the laws being proposed accomplish this?
I suppose background checks should help.
Setting up an electronic background check database in a country with over 300 million people is easy to say in a political speech but probably not a trivial IT exercise. However, with enough computer software programers working on the database and networking specialists to get different government agency computers talking to each other, it could probably be done in a handful of years.
An effective database would make it more difficult for the mentally ill or criminals to obtain weapons through legal sales. Of course, they could go ahead and buy them from illegal sources but let's not make it easy for them by allowing them to just walk up to the gun shop and get the weapons of their choice. These rules do impose some burden on law abiding citizens but in my mind, what is a few extra forms and maybe even a waiting period?
What about restrictions on types of weapons and ammunition limits?
I wondered, what is the typical handgun the police use?
Google search ...
The Glock.
Excerpts:
in the United States, American police officers were feeling that they were outgunned by criminals. A series of incidents—including an FBI shootout with a couple of psychotic bank robbers in Miami in 1986—persuaded the American cops that the gun they had been using for 75 years, the classic Smith & Wesson .38-caliber revolver, was no longer potent enough. They needed something new. And here came Gaston Glock saying, "I have the pistol of the future, and it addresses exactly what you feel you are lacking." .......... Rather than six rounds, the Glock has 17 rounds in the magazine. Instead of a 12-pound trigger pull, like the traditional revolver, it has a trigger pull of slightly more than 5 pounds. That means that someone who is a mediocre shooter or a bad shooter—as many police officers who don’t practice often enough are—will suddenly become more accurate and be more effective. The gun is much lighter, so that if you’re wearing it on your hip for 8 or 10 hours, it will be more comfortable. The Glock is literally made in a plastic mold as opposed to being assembled from steel. It’s what makes it so light; and what allows the gun to have the large capacity [is that] the plastic is very thin. The Glock is also more durable and will function if it’s not cleaned properly or regularly.
As far as long guns are concerned, the AR-15 has received the most news. And indeed, this item indicated that the Washington DC police department decided to issue them to street officers. I would guess many other police departments have taken similar steps.
Excerpt:
Although the overwhelming majority of D.C. homicides are committed with handguns, criminals have used powerful guns in recent years in some high-profile cases in the Washington area. A team of commando-style robbers carried out a string of bank heists in the District and Maryland in 2004, armed with assault rifles and handguns. At the time, police feared the crimes could be fatal, but the robbers were caught before anyone was seriously hurt. Lanier referenced a 1997 bank robbery in Los Angeles, in which two men armed with AK-47 assault rifles engaged in a shootout with police. Seventeen officers and civilians were injured in the incident, which was captured on videotape. The case set off a debate about the need to better arm police. "They crushed the police," Burke said. "If you were to look at one incident in America that got every single police department to look at their weapons, that's it." Assistant Chief Joshua Ederheimer, who is in charge of the police academy, said officers have been "very well trained." "We want to be prepared to respond to a threat," Ederheimer said. "Hopefully, we'll never have to use them."
I don't know how the gun laws are organized in terms of what types of weapons are allowed to be purchased by regular citizens. As a non-gun person, I would think the broad parameters should be as follows:
(1) Civilians should not be able to buy weapons with police/military specifications unless they go through proper training.
(2) Long guns for hunting purposes would continue but perhaps with limited ammunition magazines. I see no reason why a hunter needs 30 bullet magazines; what the cut-off should be, I don't know.
(3) Long guns for personal protection purposes again with some limits on ammunition magazines; what is an appropriate number?
(4) Hand guns for personal protection purposes with some limits on ammunition magazines; what is an appropriate number?
(5) Some kind of rigorous background checking system.
Will it be effective?
I don't know. The gun-rights side would say that criminals will still be able to get these weapons and even more powerful ones through illegal sources. Sad but true.
How do we combat illegal gun purchases perhaps an even more important issue to address?
Technology: Motorola Atrix Phone Shut-Down Problem
I have a Motorola Atrix phone through ATT. A handful of months later, it was replaced by the Atrix II.
The phone has worked reasonably well. With any first generation device, it has some occasional buggy-ness. For instance, the phone would crash periodically much like the early days of the Windows operating system. But, overall, the Atrix has worked pretty well.
But, recently, my Atrix phone would power down by itself and attempt to restart but eventually powering down again during the restart cycle. If unattended to, it would keep doing this multiple times.
I was able to stop this behavior by interrupting the restart cycle by pushing the power button and doing a forced POWER OFF. The other thing I did was pop off the battery during the restart cycle which also stopped the repeated cycle. But eventually, the phone would have the same problem in a handful of hours and sometimes sooner.
A Google search of the problem seemed to indicate that many users think this problem is due to an APP on the phone and suggested removing apps to see if the problem went away. Another user thought it was the fingerprint reader.
The fingerprint reader idea seemed plausible since the power key is also the fingerprint identity detector. And if you compare the feature details of the Atrix II to the Atrix, the Atrix II dropped the fingerprint identity reader. One wonders if Motorola knew the fingerprint identity reader was buggy?
Anyway, I disabled the fingerprint reader feature and rely exclusively on the pin code unlock security system now. The phone hasn't gone into the power down restart power down cycle since I made the change a week ago.
So if you are having this problem on your Atrix phone, give the solution I attempted a try and see if that helps.
UPDATE: I still get the occasion power down power up recycle problem. I'm now deleting APPS that I downloaded within the last 6 months in the hopes that maybe its an errant app that is causing the problem. Of course, perhaps, there is some hardware bug in the phone. Anyway, we shall see.
UPDATE: The phone just ran a Android System update 2/13/2013 and the problem has gotten more pronounced. From this discussion forum, they suspect the WiFi could be a problem. I'm now only turning on the WiFi when I know I will actively use it. But it is striking how the Android System update has made the problem worse making me think it is some kind of software bug either with the system or its relationship to some of the apps I have onboard. We shall see if the WiFi shut off helps. Will also look at deleting more apps. This is "bleeding edge" technology I guess?
The phone has worked reasonably well. With any first generation device, it has some occasional buggy-ness. For instance, the phone would crash periodically much like the early days of the Windows operating system. But, overall, the Atrix has worked pretty well.
But, recently, my Atrix phone would power down by itself and attempt to restart but eventually powering down again during the restart cycle. If unattended to, it would keep doing this multiple times.
I was able to stop this behavior by interrupting the restart cycle by pushing the power button and doing a forced POWER OFF. The other thing I did was pop off the battery during the restart cycle which also stopped the repeated cycle. But eventually, the phone would have the same problem in a handful of hours and sometimes sooner.
A Google search of the problem seemed to indicate that many users think this problem is due to an APP on the phone and suggested removing apps to see if the problem went away. Another user thought it was the fingerprint reader.
The fingerprint reader idea seemed plausible since the power key is also the fingerprint identity detector. And if you compare the feature details of the Atrix II to the Atrix, the Atrix II dropped the fingerprint identity reader. One wonders if Motorola knew the fingerprint identity reader was buggy?
Anyway, I disabled the fingerprint reader feature and rely exclusively on the pin code unlock security system now. The phone hasn't gone into the power down restart power down cycle since I made the change a week ago.
So if you are having this problem on your Atrix phone, give the solution I attempted a try and see if that helps.
UPDATE: I still get the occasion power down power up recycle problem. I'm now deleting APPS that I downloaded within the last 6 months in the hopes that maybe its an errant app that is causing the problem. Of course, perhaps, there is some hardware bug in the phone. Anyway, we shall see.
UPDATE: The phone just ran a Android System update 2/13/2013 and the problem has gotten more pronounced. From this discussion forum, they suspect the WiFi could be a problem. I'm now only turning on the WiFi when I know I will actively use it. But it is striking how the Android System update has made the problem worse making me think it is some kind of software bug either with the system or its relationship to some of the apps I have onboard. We shall see if the WiFi shut off helps. Will also look at deleting more apps. This is "bleeding edge" technology I guess?
Politics: The "Fiscal Cliff" Deal and the Road Ahead
Part I of the drama has concluded: much of the Bush era tax rates were retained with the exception for those $400,000 and up.
Part II of the drama, the spending sequester, was pushed back 2 months.
Part III of the drama, the debt limit will be coming up around the same time as the sequester deadline.
At one time, there was the thought that tax cuts would "starve" spending because the debt would become unbearable.
But, today, going forward, it is equally likely that the massive spending of recent years would "feed" the need for taxes because the debt would become unbearable.
It will be interesting which of the two "narratives" will ultimately win out.
Part II/Part III of the "Fiscal Cliff" drama could result in more taxes or cutting spending or more likely more budgetary shell games kicking the can down the road.
On the spending side, there are essentially three almost untouchable pillars being advocated by Washington:
the elderly in the form of Social Security and Medicare
the poor in welfare programs (Food Stamps, Medicaid and other programs)
the "investments" (college educational loans/grants, Green energy and various other groups with lobbying power in in DC).
As the finances in DC continue to get worse and since there appears to be no willingness to cut much less slow down the growth of the above three areas, there will be no choice but to raise taxes to meet the debts.
With the fight over income taxes just concluded, there are probably two types of taxes soon to arrive: (1) energy tax and (2) consumption tax.
The energy taxes could be based on the energy output of the source to be taxed or on the carbon footprint of the source.
A consumption tax could be in the form of a national sales tax or a European style value-added tax.
At current spending levels, the budget is going to bust and it is time for the politicians and the people to get serious about either cutting back on the programs or honestly paying for them with more taxes.
Who is going to have the profile in courage to tell that truth?
One can hope for a "balanced" approach of spending cuts and tax increases but so far the tax increase side has won all the battles to this point. But of course, taxes haven't increased enough to compensate for the even bigger increases in spending that have occurred in the last decade.
UPDATE: This author thinks the "starve" the beast side is winning.
We shall see how the Part II/Part III "fiscal cliff" drama plays out. I think the author is rather optimistic about the GOP ability to keep fending off the pressure on tax increases and capability to get spending restraint. In part II/part III, don't be surprised if there are calls for eliminating and reducing some deductions within the income tax to raise more revenue in addition to introducing the two new taxes mentioned above. One can also raise the payroll tax components of either or both Social Security and Medicare. There are no shortage of ways to raise taxes! The question is whether there will be any movement at restraining the growth of spending?
Feed the tax machine or starve the spending beast?
As it stand the debt burden falls to future generations.
Part II of the drama, the spending sequester, was pushed back 2 months.
Part III of the drama, the debt limit will be coming up around the same time as the sequester deadline.
At one time, there was the thought that tax cuts would "starve" spending because the debt would become unbearable.
But, today, going forward, it is equally likely that the massive spending of recent years would "feed" the need for taxes because the debt would become unbearable.
It will be interesting which of the two "narratives" will ultimately win out.
Part II/Part III of the "Fiscal Cliff" drama could result in more taxes or cutting spending or more likely more budgetary shell games kicking the can down the road.
On the spending side, there are essentially three almost untouchable pillars being advocated by Washington:
the elderly in the form of Social Security and Medicare
the poor in welfare programs (Food Stamps, Medicaid and other programs)
the "investments" (college educational loans/grants, Green energy and various other groups with lobbying power in in DC).
As the finances in DC continue to get worse and since there appears to be no willingness to cut much less slow down the growth of the above three areas, there will be no choice but to raise taxes to meet the debts.
With the fight over income taxes just concluded, there are probably two types of taxes soon to arrive: (1) energy tax and (2) consumption tax.
The energy taxes could be based on the energy output of the source to be taxed or on the carbon footprint of the source.
A consumption tax could be in the form of a national sales tax or a European style value-added tax.
At current spending levels, the budget is going to bust and it is time for the politicians and the people to get serious about either cutting back on the programs or honestly paying for them with more taxes.
Who is going to have the profile in courage to tell that truth?
One can hope for a "balanced" approach of spending cuts and tax increases but so far the tax increase side has won all the battles to this point. But of course, taxes haven't increased enough to compensate for the even bigger increases in spending that have occurred in the last decade.
UPDATE: This author thinks the "starve" the beast side is winning.
We shall see how the Part II/Part III "fiscal cliff" drama plays out. I think the author is rather optimistic about the GOP ability to keep fending off the pressure on tax increases and capability to get spending restraint. In part II/part III, don't be surprised if there are calls for eliminating and reducing some deductions within the income tax to raise more revenue in addition to introducing the two new taxes mentioned above. One can also raise the payroll tax components of either or both Social Security and Medicare. There are no shortage of ways to raise taxes! The question is whether there will be any movement at restraining the growth of spending?
Feed the tax machine or starve the spending beast?
As it stand the debt burden falls to future generations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)