Rene's Ramblings

Science: Looking at some data regarding global warming

2012-02-03T07:50:00.000-08:00

According to this article, one of the methods of assessing global temperatures is by satellite detection of O2 vibrations.

The web site that archives the readings is located at the University of Alabama in Huntsville Earth System Science Center.

To see a graph of the data they have been collecting. Or click on the image below.

The data has only been collected since 1978. In the grand scheme of the age of the earth, this is almost nothing. Since industrialization (around 1800), this represents about 16%

There other data regarding the question of global warming is greenhouse gases of which CO2 gets the most attention.

There are the measurements of greenhouse gases at various sites compiled at Cape Grim in Australia since 1976.

Obviously, these two bits of data aren't the only things to consider in the question of global warming.

One can say that CO2 levels are rising.

One can say the last decade has seen above average temperatures as measured by O2 vibrations though the actual rise is somewhat modest.

Additionally, the fact that the prior decade was below average suggests CO2 levels and temperatures at least in this time scale do not directly correlate.

One might say CO2 levels help drive temps up but other forces might drive them down and in the past decade the up side has been stronger.

I suspect the whole key to understanding the issue is to understand the field of paleoclimatology.

Politics: Florida Forecast

2012-01-30T21:00:00.000-08:00

Romney 39%
Gingrich 33%
Santorum 16%
Paul 12%

My PJ wearing bottom lines:
Romney gets the win but not big enough to put the race away.
Paul is running for a cause so he will keep going no matter what.
If Santorum and Gingrich both land in the 20%, Santorum will have reason to stay in. But a third place showing below 20% means he should sit down with his team after Florida to decide whether to keep going or call it a valiant effort and go home.

UPDATE:
Wow! I got the Gingrich number about right and was close on Santorum but clearly underestimated the shift to Romney! Paul's protest vote seemed to have peaked in Iowa and New Hampshire. I wonder if it is simply that those two early states like to be contrarian, whereas South Carolina (more conservative) and Florida (much larger) have an electorate that is actually voting for whom they think is a winner and less willing to make a protest vote?

Was listening to an interview with a pollster (Rasmussen?) on a podcast and he speculated that voters are seeing it as a two-man race. As such, Santorum and Paul numbers will fall as people run to the top two. He noted that polls were showing anywhere from a 5 to 16 point lead for Romney and that a result closer to the higher end of that range could be trouble for Gingrich. I suspect Gingrich will stick it out just to be combative. Paul keeps going for his cause. I think Santorum may drop out. Whether he will endorse or not, I don't know. If there is a GOP administration, wonder if he might get a cabinet slot?

UPDATE: Next up Nevada and Maine caucus followed by Colorado and Minnesota caucus which favors organization (Romney) and passionate supporters (Paul). Romney did well in all four in 2008 and solid performances in 2012 could nearly put the nomination away.

UPDATE: Here is an interesting take: If Gingrich support falls and transfers to Santorum then the result is a Romney-Santorum match up going forward. I suppose the Santorum people will be keeping an eye on the numbers to see if they scenario appears to have any validity.

Politics: More or less power to the Federal Government? A question since the founding of America!

2012-01-28T08:06:00.000-08:00

After America won its independence from England, it became apparent that the Articles of Confederation provided for too weak a central government for the nation to thrive. Thus, the Constitution was drafted to increase and yet limit the powers of the central government.

One of the great gifts of the first President, George Washington, was his good character to actually attempt to live by Constitutional limits. As the military leader of the Revolution, he was such a hero to the American people that he could have easily ruled as a dictator. In the history of the electoral college, how we select Presidents, he was the only one to receive a vote from every elector in 1788 and 1892, and thus be unanimously elected President! Nonetheless, he filled out a cabinet with strong figures with differing views and did not seek a third term.

I recently read Thomas Jefferson by R.B. Bernstein. On pp. 90-91, he described the tension between Hamilton who wanted a stronger government and Jefferson who distrusted giving more power to the federal government. Both men served in Washington's cabinet.

Excerpt:
Jefferson feared that Hamilton had plans radically at odds with the Constitution. As he saw it, Hamilton wanted to warp the federal government out of constitutional shape ....... Only a republic could preserve liberty, Jefferson insisted, and only virtue among the people could preserve a republic....... To preserve liberty, Jefferson argued, government had to be as close to the people as possible. To him, that meant a decentralized government, giving power over domestic issues to the states, the level of government closest to the people, and not to a distant federal government.

In contrast, Hamilton saw himself as free from local interests and prejudices, a true advocate of the national interest...... Doubting the state government's ability to respond to national problems, he maintained that only a strong general government could defend American interests effectively. Finally, he did not share Jefferson's faith in the people's wisdom, nor did he believe that allying the rich with the government would create a corrupt aristocracy and destroy liberty.

Doesn't this sound familiar?

The more things change the more they stay the same.

Politics: Differences between civilian and military life - Post President's 2012 SOTU Speech Analysis

2012-01-28T07:29:00.000-08:00

President Obama is noted for giving pretty good speeches. I didn't catch all of the latest SOTU. As is typical for such speeches, there was the list of proposals as well as emotionally stirring passages about some aspect of American greatness.

I tip my hat to the President for recognizing the tremendous sacrifices and dedicated work of the military in the beginning and the end of the speech.

Excerpt:
Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought -- and several thousand gave their lives.We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world. For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country. Most of al Qaeda’s top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness and teamwork of America’s Armed Forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They’re not consumed with personal ambition. They don’t obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.
...............
All that mattered that day was the mission. No one thought about politics. No one thought about themselves. One of the young men involved in the raid later told me that he didn’t deserve credit for the mission. It only succeeded, he said, because every single member of that unit did their job -- the pilot who landed the helicopter that spun out of control; the translator who kept others from entering the compound; the troops who separated the women and children from the fight; the SEALs who charged up the stairs. More than that, the mission only succeeded because every member of that unit trusted each other -- because you can’t charge up those stairs, into darkness and danger, unless you know that there’s somebody behind you, watching your back.

I have great respect for our military and I appreciate the President for highlighting their courage.

However, as I read some post-speech analysis that highlight the differences between civilian life and military life, I began to be concerned about the implications behind the use of the closing rhetorical flourish to advance the President's agenda.

As a civil society, we ask a portion of our society, the military, to essentially live by a different set of rules for the benefit of the society as a whole. This point was made by two columns I came across.

Below are some excerpts from an essay in the WaPo, Obama to the Nation: Onward Civilian Soldiers.

The armed services’ ethos, although noble, is not a template for civilian society, unless the aspiration is to extinguish politics. People marching in serried ranks, fused into a solid mass by the heat of martial ardor, proceeding in lock step, shoulder to shoulder, obedient to orders from a commanding officer -- this is a recurring dream of progressives eager to dispense with tiresome persuasion and untidy dissension in a free, tumultuous society.Progressive presidents use martial language as a way of encouraging Americans to confuse civilian politics with military exertions, thereby circumventing an impediment to progressive aspirations -- the Constitution and the patience it demands.
....................
His campaign mantra “We can’t wait!” expresses progressivism’s impatience with our constitutional system of concurrent majorities. To enact and execute federal laws under Madison’s institutional architecture requires three, and sometimes more, such majorities. There must be majorities in the House and Senate, each body having distinctive constituencies and electoral rhythms. The law must be affirmed by the president, who has a distinctive electoral base and election schedule. Supermajorities in both houses of Congress are required to override presidential vetoes. And a Supreme Court majority is required to sustain laws against constitutional challenges.

Here are some excerpts from an essay at National Review, Obama's Vision for a Spartan America.

We have a military to keep our society free. We do not have a military to teach us the best way to give up our freedom. Our warriors surrender their liberties and risk their lives to protect ours.
..................
This nation isn’t great because we work as a team with the president as our captain. America is great because America is free. It is great not because we put our self-interest aside, but because we have the right to pursue happiness.I don’t blame the president for being exhausted with the mess and bother of democracy and politics, since he has proved so inadequate at coping with the demands of both. Nor do I think he truly seeks to impose martial virtues on America. But he does desperately want his opponents to shut up and march in place.

The military as an institution is the servant of civilian authority to protect the nation from threats to the nation. It is an authority driven system because of the nature of its mission. Our government is an agreement of the people to concede some powers to its leaders. The tension between how much power to concede to a central government for the benefit of society has existed since the beginning of the American experiment.

Politics: Your mission should you decide to accept it is to design a tax system ...

2012-01-27T08:27:00.000-08:00

Here is my attempt to diagram what happens when Mr. Carl Citizen earns a salary at a company, saves money at his local bank, buys various things around town, responsibly keeps up his home, invests in a mix of dividend paying companies (so called "value" stocks) and companies that if successful will result in a capital gain (so called "growth" stocks).

Taxes are a necessary part of living in a modern society.

However, as you can imagine, Mr. Carl Citizen wonders how much government spending is useful versus wasteful and whether there are simpler and fairer ways to levy taxes for government revenue.

Non-profit of the month: January 2011 - DonorsChoose.org

2012-01-26T22:51:00.000-08:00

Their tag line: Teachers ask. You choose. Students learn.

Browse the list and see if there is something at the school you went to.

Take a look around and see if the school in your neighborhood has a project.

After finding something, go ahead and give to help fund that classroom's needs.

Science: Vitamin D and Math Modeling

2012-01-25T09:33:00.000-08:00

As a molecular biologist, I work on trying to better understanding the actions of vitamin D.

A few years back, we established a collaboration with a mathematician to see if there might be some way of looking at the problem from that angle. Click the link below to see the result!

Vitamin D Binding Protein and Monocyte Response to 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D: Analysis by Mathematical Modeling

Politics: South Carolina Bounce Onto Florida

2012-01-24T16:54:00.000-08:00

Real Clear Politics keeps running track of the major polls for Florida.

Right after Gingrich's big win in South Carolina, Insider Advantage and Rasmussen Reports reported on their 1/22 pool data (the day after the SC primary). Gingrich was up 8 and 9 percentage points respectively.

The Florida primary will be held on January 31.

Will be interesting to see what the ebb and flow of the numbers are this week and over the weekend.

Is there going to be buyer's remorse and Gingrich bounce fades?
Will Romney rally or will he continue to decline?
If there are declines in Gingrich and/or Romney's numbers, will they go to Santorum or undecided?
What will the level of die hard protest voting be for Paul?

IA numbers for 1/22:
Gingrich 34%
Romney 26%
Paul 13%
Santorum 11%
Others/undecided 16%

RR numbers for 1/22:
Gingrich 41%
Romney 32%
Santorum 11%
Paul 8%
Others/undecided 8%

The numbers have changed! And there is enough time for it to change again before next Tuesday's voting!

RR numbers for 1/25

Romney 39%

Gingrich 31%

Santorum 12%

Paul 9%

Others/undecided 9%

IA numbers for 1/25:

Romney 40%

Gingrich 32%

Paul 9%

Santorum 8%

Others/undecided 11%

RCP's collection of polls from 1/26 to 1/28 have Romney leading from 8% to 16%. Closer to 8 is more realistic. Santorum and Paul aren't doing much with around 13% and 9% respectively.

Politics: Things not looking good for the GOP Presidential nominees

2012-01-21T14:17:00.000-08:00

Leave it to Canadian Mark Steyn to cut through the noise and hit the problem with the GOP nominees on the head.

Excerpt:
Historians will look back mystified at a contest between Mitt’s soporific trimming and Newt’s histrionic showboating.

Newt is a great rhetorical puncher but will he be able to govern?

Romney's claim has been, vote for me, I can win. But he now apparently lost in Iowa and is looking to be headed to a defeat in South Carolina. He needs to make a positive case for his candidacy beyond a vague sense of inevitability.

Politics: South Carolina Primary Guesses

2012-01-20T23:00:00.000-08:00

Gingrich 35%
Romney 34%
Paul 17%
Santorum 11%
Others 3%

Gingrich being from the South gets a bump and his jabs against President Obama and the media are crowd pleasers.

Paul will continue to get around 20%. Sometimes a little more as in Iowa and New Hampshire and sometimes a little less like in South Carolina.

Santorum seems unable to repeat the Iowa success and notification that he "won" Iowa is too little too late.

Romney's railroad keeps chugging along but not exactly wowing the GOP.

Update: CNN is posting a poll with Gingrich gaining a huge lead. I'm a little skeptical that his surge is that large. Clearly, he is getting a lot of movement because people think of him as a fighter and people are in a fighting mood. But I think Romney will pick up some support from those who think Gingrich might be a little too over the top. I predicted the 1% win for Gingrich late Friday night. As I sit here in my PJs this Saturday morning, a larger win for Gingrich is probable but I don't think it will be double digits.

Update: I clearly underestimated the shift to Gingrich and the hit Romney took over his Bain life and non-revealed tax returns. Santorum's showing allows him to fight another day. Paul's drop off suggests to me that perhaps many SC voters realized they didn't want to cast a protest vote.

Now, onward to Florida! With the realization that this is a serious race, Paul's numbers should decline even further. If Romney can arrest his decline, it will be Gingrich vs. Romney. But if not, who would have guessed a few weeks back a Gingrich vs. Santorum race? We shall see!

Here is the screen shot from the NYT for the results as of 7:26pm PST.

Politics: President Obama's Team of 1% Folks

2012-01-20T10:09:00.000-08:00

How does the left feel about the 1% on its side of the aisle?

Check out the salaries of some Team Obama members in their lives before working at the White House.

$1.1 million - President Obama’s new chief of staff, Jacob Lew
$8.7 million - Prior chief of staff, William Daley
$16 million - First chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel
$5 million - National economic director, Larry Summers
$2 million - Budget director, Peter Orszag
$7 million - National security adviser, Tom Donilon

I think firing up anger at the 1% is foolish whether one truly believes the 1% are evil or whether the anger is stoked for political purposes.

Are there excesses in a capitalist society?

Yup.

Does that mean we should decry all the "1%" folks?

Nope.

Art: Time Lapse Video

2012-01-20T08:02:00.001-08:00

1.98 million hits as of this morning. Enjoy!!

Politics: Wow, things are happening fast ...

2012-01-19T12:24:00.000-08:00

A few days ago, it looked like the HMS Romney was sailing easily to victory.

But with the questions about what Bain Capital was about and his tax returns, Team Romney is bailing water.

Santorum's bounce from Iowa has clearly faded and the endorsement of an evangelical group over the weekend seems to have made little difference in his declining fortunes. Look for him to bail out after South Carolina. Who will he endorse?

Huntsman saw the writing on the wall and bailed out and endorsed Romney.

Perry saw the writing on the wall and bailed out and endorsed Gingrich.

Gingrich is gaining ground because people love a fighter and in debates he hits POTUS with one hand and the media with the other and the GOP undecideds are eating it up. But just as this is happening, ABC News lands a tell-all interview with the ex-wife. Will this make a difference?

Meanwhile, Paul marches on getting 15-20% of the vote because his two note message, cut spending and bring the troops home, draws those not happy with either party.

Pundits look for analogies to other campaigns and the fit is never perfect but how about this one?

Romney is Bush 41, a decent and honorable guy who is just a little slow footed when it comes to rough and tumble politics and not too alert to the optics of how he comes across.

Gingrich is Bill Clinton, brilliant, charismatic but volatile.

Paul is Ross Perot, absolutely unelectable but tapping into major concerns in the electorate.

Clinton won the Presidency in 1992. Will Gingrich win the GOP nomination in 2012?

Anyway, tonight's debate could be huge:
Gingrich will have to answer about the ex-wife interview, keep up the good jabs against President Obama and the media and avoid over-the-top snark against Romney.
Romney needs to defend Bain Capital, explain his tax returns and regain the initiative.

Faith: Eucharist Haiku

2012-01-17T08:19:00.000-08:00

Tearing up the bread
Darkness falls hard, the wine spills
At the cross, he pays

Pass around the bread
Share at table, the good wine
We remember him

He breaks the warm bread
He pours out the cup of wine
We are home with him

Politics: Bain Capital - Venture Capitalism or Vulture Capitalism

2012-01-12T20:00:00.000-08:00

Mr. Romney cites his experience in leading Bain Capital as one of his qualification for the Presidency.

However, he has come under attack for that role.

One would think his role at Bain would be easy to assess. Alas, because of the nature of a private equity company, it isn't so simple according to this Politico.com article.

Memo to Romney campaign: if you think Newt and Perry are hitting hard, wait until Team Obama hits with $100+ million of negative ads. If the truth is your friend, you got to get hard facts out there AND compelling narratives.

Sports: Pac12 and March Madness

2012-01-11T23:00:00.000-08:00

It is a down year for the Pac12.

The question on the minds of Pac12 fans (and in my case a UCLA fan) is how many teams the Pac12 will get into the tournament?

As of today, Lunardi has three teams in: Stanford as a 9 seed, California as an 11 and Colorado a 14. Lunardi has Colorado in only because it is currently atop the Pac12. If that were not the case, I think he would only have two Pac12 teams in. However, he has Arizona sitting in the first four out group; thus, Arizona could get in under the right circumstances bringing the Pac12 invites back up to three.

The winner of the Pac12 tournament automatically gets into March Madness.

I would guess that if the Pac12 tournament winner is not the regular season champion, the regular season champion would get in as an at-large. This would be the best path for UCLA. I suspecting for UCLA to finish number two in the regular season and lose in the Pac12 tournament might be risky unless the loss is in the Pac12 championship game against the #1 seed. UCLA has no quality wins in its out-of-conference record and two terrible losses (LMU, MTSU). Thus, UCLA needs a dominant performance within the Pac12 to have a shot at an at-large if they don't win outright.

The worst case scenario for the Pac12 is if the regular season champion has five or six losses and loses in an early round in the Pac12 tournament. If this is the case, could the selection committee opt to take only one Pac12 team?

Politics: New Hampshire Primary Predictions

2012-01-10T02:00:00.000-08:00

Like any other blogger in pajamas, I can make predictions about the elections!

New Hampshire is somewhat different than Iowa for various reasons:

The primary system allows more casual voters to participate compared to the more activist participation rules of a caucus of Iowa. Thus, it is a more moderate electorate.
I think New Hampshire allows non-registered Republican voters to cross over and vote in the primary. Thus, liberal and independent non-Republican voters can boost certain candidates.
Historically, New Hampshire voters almost have an anti-Iowa mood as shown in recent history in recent contested GOP election cycles.

Iowa winner

1980 - Bush

1988 - Dole

1996 - Dole

2000 - Bush

2008 - Huckabee

2012 - Romney/Santorum (essentially it was a tie)

New Hampshire winner

1980 - Reagan

1988 - Bush

1996 - Buchanan

2000 - McCain

2008 - McCain

2012 - ?

I think the unique features of NH probably helps Huntsman the most. Also, Huntsman camped out in New Hampshire much like Santorum worked Iowa hard and so he will get a good amount of the not-Romney vote within the Republicans and he should draw a decent amount of the moderate/independent voters that can cross into the voting.

Paul will consistently draw around 20% of the vote because of his slash Washington spending (drawing libertarian and some conservatives supporters) and isolationist foreign policy (a mix of liberal, independent and libertarians who all share in common that particular viewpoint). Am guessing in NH he might get a bit more than the 21% he got in Iowa.

Santorum got a bounce out of Iowa but I don't think it will be enough to overcome how far down he was. But he will get the more conservative not-Romney vote.

My guess is that Gingrich is going to fade.

My guts tell me Romney will win but not get the "knock-out" their campaign is hoping for.

My predictions:
Romney 34%
Paul 23%
Huntsman 18%
Santorum 15%
Gingrich 8%
Others 2%

UPDATE: My predictions underestimated (5.4%) Romney's vote totals and over estimated Santorum's support (5.7%). Pretty much on target for Paul, Huntsman and Gingrich.

Politics: The new health bill - promises and problems

2012-01-10T00:30:00.000-08:00

Having been through the recent open enrollment period at work late last year and looking at the various health plans. I realize that health plans come in really two major flavors. Pay more per month but pay less in deductibles and co-pays when you have major health services. The other type has lower monthly payments but higher deductibles and co-pays when you have major health services.

How will the health law affect these flavors I don't know.

What are some features in the new health law and what are the promises and problems that might arise?

The new health plan tries to get rid of denial of coverage due to pre-existing conditions.

Having heard and read stories of honest people getting the run-around from insurance companies on these issues, one can understand the desire to shake up the system. The insurance companies do deserve the PR black eye they get for those stories.

But there is another side to the story in defense of the insurance companies because the sad reality is that some people are "gaming" the system. Some unscrupulous people will wait until they get sick and then they buy insurance. Thus, insurance companies will investigate those patients and sometimes they deny properly against people "gaming" the system. But, of course, sometimes they wind up harassing people who are honest.

To avoid this problem, the health law has the insurance mandate that forces people to buy insurance or face a financial penalty.

Again, some people will still "game" the system and take the penalty rather than buy insurance since the penalty is likely to be far less than insurance premiums. The most likely example of this calculation will be younger people who may opt not to buy insurance because their relatively high premiums help pay for the insurance of older more expensive customers. Instead, younger people may take their chances they won't need insurance and pay the fine instead.

The mandate provision hasn't taken affect yet and it is being challenged with arguments to be heard in the Supreme Court some time in 2012.

Thus, if the provision survives, it will be interesting to see how it will actually play out.

Best case scenario:
People actually decide to buy insurance rather than face financial penalties.

Worst case scenario:
People still "game" the system thus defeating any benefits from these two provisions.

The health law expands eligibility for Medicaid and offers premium support of private insurance offered through state operated exchanges.

The problem here is that the Medicare program is already pushing state budgets to the breaking point as it is. With the expanded eligibility, those state budgets will be pushed even further into the red. Also, where does the Federal government find the money to offer premium support for people buying through the exchanges?

Best case scenario:
State are allowed to experiment in the Medicaid program because the status quo version is financially unsustainable. The state run exchanges don't overdo the regulations leading to robust competition within them keeping costs in check.

Worst case scenario:
The Medicaid program continues to run red ink pushing forcing states to cut other services and/or raise taxes to try to keep the bills paid for Medicaid. The state exchanges overdo the regulations such that insurance companies drop out of the health insurance business reducing choice and competition.

To raise revenues, the health law increases taxes on the wealthy, imposes fees on medical device makers and drug companies, penalizes high end health insurance subscribers and adds various other taxes and fees.

Taxation levels are a tricky thing. At one level, people do accept taxation as part of maintaining functions of society. But there is a hypothetical level of taxation that becomes punitive and people begin to change their behavior. It will be interesting to see whether the new taxes really raise the revenues expected.

One can imagine a group of engineers who design and manufacture medical devices may at some point make the calculation to get out of the industry and make some other kinds of widgets that are more profitable. Drug companies potentially could forgo certain lines of research because they may not be profitable enough to compensate for the additional fees they may face. As for taxes on the wealthy, indeed some people are so wealthy that it really won't matter to them what the taxation rate is. But for those "on the margin" of the next tax rate, they might hold back figuring earning those extra dollars isn't worth it if it pushes them into the next tax bracket. If these kinds of behaviors become common, innovation decreases and revenues won't meet expectations.

Best case scenario:
The taxes raise the expected revenue and don't inhibit innovation in medical devices and treatments.

Worst case scenario:
Tax revenues don't meet expectations forcing the raising of other taxes. Medical device companies develop fewer devices and others get out of the business. Drug companies shrink their research portfolios to concentrate on projects they think are more sure bets.

To cut costs, the health law imposes indirect price controls on insurance companies and reduces compensation in Medicare.

Price controls direct or indirect tends to diminish quality or supply or both. Using a crude example, if you fix the price of "widgets" too low, the manufacturer of the widget may reduced the quality of the product thus increasing her profit margin when selling it. The other outcome is that some manufacturers will get out of the widget business and look for other more profitable goods thus leading to shortages.

Best case scenario:
The indirect price controls turn out to be mild enough that insurance companies don't get out of the health insurance business but still keeps a lid on medical inflation. Reduced compensation to medical providers in Medicare doesn't continue to result in medical providers opting out of Medicare contracts.

Worst case scenario:
Indirect price controls lead insurance companies to drop their health insurance business units reducing choice and competition. Remaining companies cut quality to sustain profitability. Reduced Medicare compensation rates leads to doctors refusing to see Medicare patients leading to shortages and diminished quality.

Certainly, the health law gets an "A" for good intentions. It will be closely watched whether reality turns out to be closer to the best or worst case scenarios.

World: Iraq and the Vietnam Analogy

2012-01-08T04:21:00.000-08:00

The US fought in Vietnam for a long time. The last American troops left in 1973. In 1975, Saigon fell.

Will Iraq be like Vietnam?

Some will say that South Vietnam's collapse was inevitable and that the American presence there just delayed it.

Some will say the same of Iraq. The argument goes that Iraq was destined for civil war without a dictator like Hussein ruling with an iron fist.

What is the "answer" to the historical "what if" regarding the Iraq war?

What would have happened if there was no war and Saddam Husein remained in power?

How would Afghanistan be today if instead of invading Iraq we had put in more troops in Afghanistan earlier on?

Would the governments of Egypt, Tunisia and Libya have fallen without the Iraq invasion?

Some will say, eventually Hussein would have died or someone would have staged a coup and civil war would break out with the support of the neighboring Iranians.

Some will say, whether American troops stayed in large numbers or not, the Taliban would have made a comeback sooner or later because the neighboring Pakistanis support the Taliban and enough people within Afghanistan want them in power.

Some will say that Egypt, Tunisia and Libya's authoritarian governments would eventually have died of old age or be overthrown by Jihad minded revolutionaries. In either case, Jihad minded revolutionaries would take over eventually.

"Nation building" is very difficult. Were the missions in Afghanistan and Iraq doomed to failure in the long run after the short term successes of ousting the Taliban and deposing Hussein?

Would it be cruel to suggest that the success stories of post-World War II Germany and Japan came as a result of the Allied armies essentially laying waste to both countries and forcing them to rebuild from scratch? America defeated the Tailban and Iraq military forces on the field. But those battles resulted in nowhere near the type of destruction the German and Japanese armies and population centers experienced. Is it possible that nations can only be rebuilt into a new society if the old one is utterly destroyed?

Or is there something uniquely problematic about the Middle East and Central Asia?

Was nation building a fool's errand?

If this is the case, then the US should give up on Iraq and let them have their civil war and wait for the bloodied survivors to emerge. Likewise, the US should leave Afghanistan and let forces in Kabul fight it out with the Taliban and wait for the blooded survivors to claim victory.

Is this the most moral thing to do?

Under this approach, the only scenario where US forces would intervene is to bomb and raid terrorist training camps that would probably start appearing in Iraq and Afghanistan. I suppose if chemical weapons factories started showing up on satellite photos, those too would be legitimate targets. But otherwise, the US should leave them alone and let them kill each other until they decide to stop when they have bled enough.

Is this more moral than what we have been doing?

Which is more moral, the inaction of the pacifist or isolationist or the intervention of the US global policeman?

This is depressing.

Politics: US Military Spending

2012-01-07T05:16:00.000-08:00

How much do you think the US spends on its military?

How much should the US spend on its military?

Below are three graphs that show how much the US actually spent on its armed forces in recent history.

The first graph goes all the way back to 1930. As you can see, there was the huge spike in the 1940s during World War II. American truly transitioned into a war economy at one point having 42% of all economic activity devoted to the military.

The second graph shows the period from 1950 to 1980. One can note the peak in the 1950s probably due to the Korean War and the Cold War with the USSR. In the 50s, routinely 10% or more of the US economy was dedicated to military spending. President Eisenhower warned of the military-industrial complex. And indeed, since then, the USA has not spent near the levels of the early 50s.

In the 60s, America fought in Vietnam and kept a strong military for the ongoing Cold War. 8 1/2 to 11 cents of every dollar in the US was placed toward defense spending.

In the 70s, the Vietnam War ended for America (last troops out in 1973; Saigon fell in 1975) and various peace movements and anti-nuclear weapons protests were felt by the politicians such that spending on the military fell from 9% of GDP down to 5.5%.

The third graph picks up the statistics from 1980 to current times. Rhetorically, people called the Reagan military build up massive. Indeed, it rose from 6% to 7% of GDP and was sustained for a handful of years but it was hardly massive (see the first graph above and note the relatively shallow upward hump in the graph for the 1980s). Also, put in historical perspective, the levels of military spending during the Reagan years were less than typical spending in the 1950s and 1960s.

With the fall of the Iron Curtain in the 1990s, defense spending fell all the way down to 3.5% of GDP. But alas, America was snapped back into the hard reality of the ways of the world when September 11, 2001 changed the landscape. Defense spending rose up to 6% of GDP while fighting raged in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The US has pulled out of Iraq and is reducing its commitment in Afghanistan; thus, spending on defense will decline once again.

Question: how much should America be spending on its military?

The reality is that when something terrible happens in the world, whose phone is going to ring?

Indeed, the phone in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue rings and POTUS (Democrat or Republican) will answer and have to decide whether or not US armed forces will be sent. The budget and strategy mapped out in the next couple of years will determine what kind of capability and numbers POTUS can call upon to respond to a crisis.

Politics: "Non-partisan" California Redistricting Apparently Partisan

2012-01-03T21:44:00.000-08:00

Recently, in California, a ballot measure was placed before the voters to establish a "non-partisan" commission to draw up the boundaries for various elective offices. The theory was to take the process out of the hands of the elected officials who would draw up district lines that protected themselves and their parties from competitive elections.

Alas, it appears that the "non-partisan" commission's work got manipulated by partisans posing as non-partisans.

Excerpts:
The report included an exclusive interviewwith a redistricting commission member who alleged partisanbehavior by his supposedly non-partisan commission colleagues, butthe series didn’t cause much attention in the media, the Capitol,or among the public. Apparently, no one was surprised that acommission formed with the best of intentions - i.e., taking backroompolitical deal-making out of the process by which political lineswere drawn - was cynically manipulated to create a partisanadvantage.
.......
Commissioner GabinoAguirre managed to obtain a Senate district for his friend,Democratic Assemblyman Das Williams, in Santa Barbara and VenturaCounties. Aguirre made a campaign contribution to Williams after hewas in the running for membership on the commission, and thenhelped craft the new Williams district without disclosing hiscontribution to anyone. He also helped draw the district intendedto end the career of GOP Sen. Tony Strickland. Aguirre hosted afund raiser in 2008 for the candidate running against Strickland’swife.
.......
Let this be a reminder of how easily any reform - no matter howappealing it may sound - can and will be manipulated by those who aremost skilled at the political game. In California, reform measurespromoted by political novices will undoubtedly be manipulated bythe pros.

The LA Times was not convinced that the process was corrupted.

Here are maps at the LA Times.

As you can see, the maps are quite hard to read in the big cities.

Compare the California maps with a rural state like Iowa where district lines are probably a bit easier to draw without strange shapes. California districts have to accommodate widely varying population densities. Also, in California, the map drawing is complicated by the requirements to take into account the ethnic groups in proposed districts.

The LA Times also has the proposed districts broken down by party registration and ethnic distribution.

Politics: Iowa Prediction

2012-01-03T07:58:00.000-08:00

I think Ron Paul's isolationist views are not a good idea but he captures the anti-Washington sentiment and has a very loyal following. Rick Santorum is now the current not-Romney candidate.

Thus, my forecast:
Paul 24%
Romney 23%
Santorum 21%
Gingrich 13%
Perry 9%
Bachman 7%
Others 3%

UPDATE: Here is a screen grab below from the NY Times. My predictions were pretty close to the final results in the sense I figured the top 3 would be pretty bunched up with some spread between the other three.

Life: Thoughts by the Shore

2012-01-01T14:44:00.000-08:00

The constant crash of sea to shore
How small we on this earthly place
Enamored with our thoughts that roar
Drowning out God's whispers of grace.

You are constant as sea to sand.
Water gently caressing my feet
Sand settling around where I stand
Embedding grace - God and I meet.

Non-profit of the Month: December 2012 - Salvation Army

2011-12-23T12:36:00.000-08:00

There aren't quite as many places as there used to be that permit the red kettles with bell ringers that collect donations for the Salvation Army. But with the internets, one can go online to donate.

A few years back I was a volunteer bell ringer. That experience was recounted on this blog over here.

In any case, hope you will consider giving to the Salvation Army or some other group that is helping people in our communities.

Merry Christmas!

Non-Profit of the Month: November 2011 - Hope for the Warriors

2011-12-20T13:29:00.000-08:00

When I think of Iraq and Afghanistan, I often think of the photographs that are shown on television or the newspaper of the most recent deaths. The deaths have exceeded 6000. In addition, there are tens of thousands that have been wounded in mind and body who have come home. And finally, there are the loved ones of those who have died or have been injured. These too bear the burdens of war in the loss of a loved one or the ongoing care giving to one who has suffered the wounds of the wars.

And so for this month's non-profit of the month, I'm supporting Hope for the Warriors.

There are many organizations like this big and small, national and local who have gathered together good hearted people to stand with and support our service members and their families.

Please consider supporting one of these groups doing this kind of work.

Non-Profit of the Month: October 2011 - Friends of LA Phil and Venice Family Clinic

2011-12-04T12:52:00.001-08:00

Have been a subscriber to LA Phil since 1999. Ticket revenue covers part of their cost. The rest comes from individual donations and corporate sponsorships. The LA Phil also does educations events for youth in the city so I've tried each year to chip in a little bit by donating to Friends of LA Phil.

Another cause I've been supporting regularly is Venice Family Clinic.

Politically, it is going to take some time to sort through the government role in health care. In the mean time, I think people should support local entities that are doing whatever they can.

Politics: Controversy over Herman Cain

2011-11-08T18:42:00.000-08:00

Have very mixed feelings at this point.

If the charges against Herman Cain are true, I would be very troubled and disappointed.

This interview on CNN would lend support to at least one of the accusers.

When charges were leveled against then candidate Bill Clinton and eventually President Bill Clinton, I was troubled and disappointed by his possible behavior.

These kind of charges sometime sank candidates (Gary Hart and John Edwards in recent election cycles).

But, historically, many of our Presidents have not been paragons of virtue in their personal lives and yet, many of them were effective Presidents.

Thus, there is the problem: the charges, even if all true, against Herman Cain are probably no worse than some of the things done by past Presidents.

What should we expect from our political leaders?

Do we want a brilliant brain surgeon who is a jerk removing brain tumors from people or a genial mediocre one?

JFK is regarded highly by many in both parties. Yet, would JFK have been elected in today's news environment?

In Europe, their political leaders often have complicated personal situations and they are rather open about it and their voters don't seem to care. As such, Europeans view American pre-occupation with scandals of a personal nature as a reflection of American "puritanical" attitudes.

So what should we expect from our political leaders?

I want more from our leaders but realistically understand that people are flawed especially those with the ambition to rise to such levels. Think of your circle of friends: do any of them want to be President? People who run and make it to this level are in many ways automatically not "normal" in some ways!

In an ideal world, I want a candidate for President to have policies that are good for the nation, inspirational leadership qualities, demonstrated some experience in running a governmental entity (running a business isn't like running a government) and personal virtue.

The question for voters like me is what degree of failure in personal virtue (we all have weaknesses) is disqualifying.

Disclaimer: I didn't vote for Clinton in 1992 or 1996 for various reasons. In examining the field of GOP candidates for 2012, as appealing as the idea is of an outsider business person running for President, I believe some familiarity with governance is helpful, hence my doubts about Cain prior to the current scandals. The current scandal has added to my doubts.

UPDATE: Goldberg at NR put it this way. Excerpt: My own view is that Cain has other shortcomings that are more substantive disqualifiers for the job of president, but if these charges are true then they are relevant and troubling in their own right.

UPDATE: CNN.com has this item that describes how companies often settle to make the problem go away. Excerpt: Employment lawyers are accustomed to meeting with CEO clients who are initially defiant and determined to resist a false claim of sexual harassment. They want their reputations and integrity preserved. But when a high-ranking executive is involved, the company rumor vine begins to grow. Depositions are taken. Employees are pulled out of the workplace to back one side or the other. Sterling reputations begin to bleed under the slash of a thousand paper cuts.

And of course, the litigation process is expensive for the company. Knowing this, experienced lawyers often urge even the innocent accused executive to agree to mediate claims informally and avoid the possibility of a very public and very embarrassing federal lawsuit. Legitimate victims are also urged to settle rather than risk losing at trial.

Once mediation begins, the parties are told that public humiliation and legal costs can be avoided with a quiet, confidential settlement. Both plaintiff and defendant are simultaneously silenced by the agreement's penalty provisions. The truth of the claims will never be tested in any public forum.

Religion: What is a cult?

2011-10-19T16:56:00.000-07:00

There are a number of definitions offered at Merriam-Webster Dictionary online.

In recent news, a pastor was criticized for calling Mormonism a cult.

Cult in typical American English usage is definition number 5 in MW:
great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement or work (as a film or book)

For example, the film Blade Runner is considered a cult classic. In this case, there are fans of the film who really like the film a lot and will buy the "director's cut" of the film and have collector's items associated with the movie and know many details about the film and the making of the film.

Certain musical bands garner a cult following.

Some libertarians would be described as very devoted to the writings of Ayn Rand and that devotion seems cultic to non-devotees.

In these contexts, the term cult is somewhat descriptive and depending on tone of voice may or may not be a disparaging.

Cult in a religious context tends to be disparaging as it usually describes a religious group where usually one leader (or small number) has a charismatic hold over his/her followers and the peer pressure of the group makes it hard for anyone to leave the group.

However, there is a descriptive definition of cult as described by definition number 3 in MW:
a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious

There are groups within the major world religions.

For example, in Judaism, there are orthodox, conservative and reform congregations. The three groups are not identical but they share much in common.

In Christianity, there are Catholic, Orthodox and various Protestant denominations. Thus, on many (most) doctrinal matters there would be agreement. Yet, there would be some areas of distinctive.

And so within a given religion, there can be and are groups that hold beliefs that would be considered unorthodox or spurious to the vast majority of the adherents of the orthodox/historical form of that given religion.

This would be the case with Mormonism which is also known as the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints (LDS). Mormons use much the same language of traditional Christianity. However, they call themselves the Latter-Day Saints because they believe that the historic forms of Christianity lost the true message which the LDS believes they have recovered.

Objectively speaking there are three possibilities: the Mormon claims are correct, the Mormon claims are incorrect or both the Mormon and traditional Christian claims are incorrect.

However, as a matter of intellectually honesty, regardless of the correctness of the claims of either group, is there significant divergence in beliefs between the LDS church and the historic Christian church?

A Catholic priest, Protestant minister and Mormon elder go to have breakfast at a local diner and write down the beliefs of their churches on paper. What would happen?

The lists would not be identical.

The Catholic list would have more similarities to the Protestant list than to the Mormon list.

Thus, under MW definition #3, Mormonism is a cult.

However, given that much of the American public has in their minds that cult is definition #5, it is not useful to call Mormonism a cult.

A more precise way to describe the LDS church would be, a religious group that holds some aspects of Christian doctrine yet differs with historic Christan beliefs in a number of key areas.

I heard one Protestant pastor describe his relationship with Mormon friends this way, we have significant theological differences but we work together on issues that matter to our communities and our country.

Politics: Herman Cain's 9-9-9 Plan?

2011-10-17T08:59:00.000-07:00

Am not an economist. Have not read in any detail the 9-9-9 plan promoted by candidate Herman Cain. Just have my gut reaction to the idea.

My 59 second understanding of the plan is that the Federal Government tax system would be overhauled and replaced with 9% corporate income tax, 9% personal income tax and 9% sales tax.

The virtue of the plan is simplicity. As it is now, the tax code is loaded with deductions and credits and other adjustments that distort economic behavior.

In an ideal world, a tax system should accomplish two things:
(1) raise sufficient revenue to fund government services
(2) be simple so that there is reduced incentive to outright cheat (illegal) on taxes, engage in activity (legal) to shelter money from taxation and keeps compliance costs down.

"Fairness" of a tax system is a highly subjective criteria in comparison to the other two criteria.

Examples of "fairness" questions would be:
At what income level should someone begin to pay personal income taxes?
If someone makes more income, how much more should they pay?

Ironically, the desire to make the rich pay their "fair share," can cause problems which even LA Times lefty commentator George Skelton noted. Excerpt: If President Obama really wants to see the "Buffett Rule" in action, he should look at California's tax system. The state has been plagued by it for years. The revenue stream is unstable and the state budget has been a deficit disaster. Soaking the rich - relying heavily on them for income taxes - has resulted in a precarious revenue roller coaster ride. It's either boom or bust in Sacramento, depending on how the wealthy are faring in the stock market and their other investments.

In any case 9-9-9 has the virtue of simplicity, criteria #2.

But how about criteria #1?

Does it raise enough money to fund the government?

The rate numbers could be raised up/down to bring the budget into balance.

In many ways, the greater question is how much do we want the government to spend and are we willing to have a tax system of whatever variety to bring in revenue to pay for it?

Matching revenue with spending is really the first question.

With that question answered, we can then move onto the second one of devising a system that raises revenue effectively without the distortions in economic behavior that the current system has.

In that regard, I think most simple systems with minimal credits and deductions would suffice: 9-9-9 mix of corporate, income and sales tax, national sales tax only with a rebate for low income, flat income tax with exception for low income, 3 income tax bracket, etc.

The challenge is that the current system has provisions put in by political winners to benefit their group and punishes political losers!

Sweeping away all those tax credits, deductions, loopholes and provisions would result in huge political battles.

If we can decide how much government we want and sweep out all the various competing interests baked into the tax code... that would really be something!

UPDATE: Conservative icon National Review is against 9-9-9. I didn't realize that the 9-9-9 plan is just a transition to a national sales tax only plan. In regards to the fairness issue, looks like 9-9-9 might be hard on the lower income folks. Also, there is the difficult political reality of going from our existing system to any proposed system that is radically different. As it is, if any change is to occur, the feasible practical thing to do would be paring back the various tax credits, deductions and loopholes of the existing system in exchange for lower rates rather than shoot-the-moon with a brand new system.

Cato's Dan Mitchell has mixed feelings about 9-9-9. Excerpt: After all, Europe’s welfare states began their march to fiscal collapse and economic stagnation after they added a version of a national sales tax on top of their pre-existing income taxes.

Non-profit of the month: September 2011 - California State Parks Foundation

2011-09-02T09:37:00.000-07:00

There are many natural wonders and places of historic interest in California that are worth preserving.And so there is a public aspect of it through the state government of California. Put there is also the part that citizens play in banding together to advocate for and do projects for the benefit of parks.

Thus, I'm supporting California State Parks Foundation.

Here is their "about us" paragraph:

The California State Parks Foundation (CSPF) was founded in 1969 by William Penn Mott, Jr., former director of both California's Department of Parks and Recreation and the National Park Service. With our 120,000 members, CSPF is the only statewide independent nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting, enhancing and advocating for California's magnificent state parks. Since 1969, CSPF has raised more than $170 million to benefit state parks. CSPF is committed to improving the quality of life for all Californians by expanding access to the natural beauty, rich culture and history, and recreational and educational opportunities offered by California's 278 state parks—the largest state park system in the United States.

Politics: Picking Presidents

2011-08-15T10:46:00.000-07:00

I think people select presidents for some combination of the following three reasons: inspirational leadership, agreement on policy and demonstrated experience.

With the advent of 24/7 media, the inspirational leadership element is probably the most crucial. You might agree with someone on policy and they might have a terrific resume but if they come across as dull they will have a very hard time getting nominated or elected.

The agreement on policy part reflects itself on two levels of the process. In the general election, probably 33% of the people will vote for a Democrat because they are life-long Democrats and 33% of the people will vote for a Republican because they are life-long Republicans. That is a simple reflection of policy preferences.

The other level where policy preferences show up is among the activists in the nomination process. In the GOP, there are probably three major groups: the economic libertarians, the social conservatives and the national defense hawks. The Democrats would have the same three types: New Deal/Great Society (FDR and LBJ ushered in many new government programs), the social activists (pro-abortion, anti-gun, environmentalists, etc) and the anti-war doves.

Finally, people look at experience. But in truth, the other two factors often trump considerations of experience. Let's look at the presidents in my lifetime.

On the thin side of experience:
Obama - elected while first term senator
Bush 43 - elected while second term governor
Carter - elected after one term as governor

Some experience:
Clinton - served multiple terms as a governor of a small state
Reagan - two terms as governor of a large state
Kennedy - second term senator and three term house member

Much experience:
Bush 41 - VP and many other roles in government
Ford - VP and 24 years in House
Nixon - VP, one term senator, three term house member
LBJ - VP and 12 years in Senate and 12 years in House

Non-Profit of the Month: August 2011 - Union Station Homeless Services

2011-08-10T08:17:00.000-07:00

There is a story told by Jesus about Lazarus and the Rich Man. In the pointed story, the Rich Man did nothing to help Lazarus, the poor man who begged for help at the Rich Man's gate.

In Jesus time and in today, the question remains: how can one help the poor? Doing nothing is not an option. If we take the words of Jesus seriously, doing nothing is one road to hell fire of judgement.

I've been told, if one gives money directly to someone on the street, it is likely they will use that money for drugs or alcohol. Thus, in the desire to help them, we may be enabling them to hurt themselves further.

As such, I have decided to give to reputable organizations that helps the poor in practical ways like Union Station in Pasadena.

In the final analysis, the issues of poverty and homelessness often involve many factors and it takes compassionate professionals and highly committed volunteers to effectively offer help. Organizations like Union Station do that and so I hope you will consider supporting them or other groups like them who have a track record of making a difference.

Politics: Debt deal near?

2011-08-01T12:23:00.000-07:00

They say it should be soon later today.

Politics is "the art of the possible" and this was probably about all that could be done.

The White House wanted the problem pushed past the November 2012 elections.

The Democrats wanted to minimize the chances of spending cuts.

The Republicans wanted to minimize the chances of raising taxes.

And so you get "the deal."

In the House, some Tea Party Republicans will vote no because it doesn't do enough and some Left Democrats will vote no because it does too much. Look for a strange mix of Democrats and Republicans voting yes and no.

How about this for a guess?
Yes
170 Republican
100 Democrat
No
70 Republican
93 Democrat

UPDATE:

UPDATE: In a heart warming moment, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords cast her vote for the deal in her return to the House as she continues her recovery since being shot in January.

In the Senate, I would anticipate passage with some dissent also. My guess:
Yes
40 Democrat
39 Republican
No
13 Democrat
8 Republican

UPDATE: The final vote was 74-26. Democrat support was a bit stronger than I expected with 46 votes and GOP support was weaker with 28. In the end, it passed with apparently little drama.

On substance, the deal just doesn't do all that much. It gets the government past the immediate debt limit problem but doesn't solve the debt problem itself.

$2.5 trillion is a dent in the problem.

The current debt is about $14.5 trillion but the really big number is the future unfunded liabilities in the bottom right of the debt clock. They estimate it to be $115 trillion!

I've seen other estimates but if the $115 trillion is overstated by a factor of two, the problem is still $57.5 trillion.

Science: BPA Concerns May Have Been Overstated

2011-07-26T09:57:00.000-07:00

One of the things about belonging to a professional society is that one can receive occasional news round-ups of items that might be of interest.

As someone who likes hiking, I heard about BPA in the context of Nalgene deciding to shift the making of their water bottles to plastics that do not contain BPA.

In their BPA FAQ Nalgene said this:
We are confident that the bottles which contain BPA are safe for their intended use. However, because of consumer requests for alternative materials, we have decided to transition our polycarbonate product line to Eastman Tritan™ copolyester. This product joins our family of bottles and containers made of various non-BPA materials such as HDPE, PP, LDPE and PET.
...
Based on the findings of the Food and Drug Administration, The Environmental Protection Agency, The European Food Safety Authority, The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, The Japan Ministry of Health, Labor & Welfare, The American Plastics Council and other reliable sources from around the world, we continue to firmly believe in the safety of our products containing BPA. However, we intend to carefully monitor the results of the National Toxicology Report and the Canadian government’s inquiry into this issue and any other relevant scientific information.

In a recent email news update from one of the scientific professional societies, there was a link to this item about BPA.

Excerpt:
“In a nutshell, says Teeguarden, “we can now say for the adult human population exposed to even very high dietary levels, blood concentrations of the bioactive form of BPA throughout the day are below our ability to detect them, and orders of magnitude lower than those causing effects in rodents exposed to BPA.”

The study was entirely funded by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), while the analytical work was duplicated by two other government laboratories to ensure extra rigor. The researchers used the latest and most sensitive techniques to find BPA as determined by the CDC (LC/MS/MS using on-line 2-dimensional liquid chromatography if you are curious). Moreover, the new study corroborates earlier independent studies which showed that BPA was rapidly absorbed, detoxified, and eliminated from humans.

I don't know how widely reported this study will be. But I pass it along via this blog to those who might have concerns about BPA. From a business perspective, does this mean BPA will once again be used?

As it is now, my current hiking water bottles are of the newer Nalgene BPA-free variety. Hopefully, there isn't some other chemical in those plastics that might be the subject of investigation in the future?!

Politics: Playing Debt Chicken or Is it a Poker Game?

2011-07-25T13:20:00.000-07:00

That about sums it up.

Both sides want to avoid problems with the debt limit.

But each side wants something in exchange for raising the nations credit limit.

The Republicans want the growth of government to be slowed down and are using the debt limit as leverage.

The Democrats want the growth of government to continue and are using the debt limit as leverage.

Each side thinks the other will be blamed for any resultant economic chaos if the debt limit is not raised.

From a hard headed political perspective, the key is probably the Senate Democrats. They have the edge 53-47.

If those four votes can't be peeled off, the Democrats will blame the House Republicans for the failure.

But if four of them were to be swayed by an offer from the House, a deal would then pass the House and Senate leaving the White House with the burden of issuing a veto.

UPDATE: I made a terrible mistake in forgetting the culture of the Senate that manifests itself in the "cloture rule." Simply stated, debate can be closed (cloture) with a vote of 60. Thus, the deal making must bring over 7 Republican Senators.

In order for the House to reverse course, 26 Republicans have to switch which could happen but that is unlikely given that both sides of the House have pretty solid party discipline. Senators traditionally have been more willing to break the party line.

UPDATE: The current scenario is that the Speaker of the House will have to bring over Democrat house members to counter the no votes from the Tea Party Wing of the GOP House members.

It is a high stakes poker game and both sides have lousy cards but one side will take the pot when the blame falls on the other.

Politics: CBO Projections as of June 2011

2011-07-12T23:24:00.000-07:00

For your bed-time reading.

I haven't read the thing but I've skimmed a few sections here and there and I've looked at some of the graphs where as they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Here are the ones that caught my eye.

The "Extended-Baseline Scenario" assumes that current tax and spending policies are not changed going forward. Thus, some tax cuts that are set to expire actually expire and some tax increases set to take place do become activated. Likewise, spending increases and decreases currently projected to occur become realized.

As you can see most spending remains steady except for the health care part of the budget (Medicare for elderly, Medicaid for poor, CHIP for children and Exchange subsidies for the newly passed 2010 health reform law) which looks to increase 2-3 fold.

The revenue line grows to 30% of the GDP to cover the increased spending.

The "Alternative Fiscal Scenario" is based on current tax and spending policies but assumes some of the tax increases expected to occur in the "Extended-Baseline Scenario" will not occur for obvious political reasons as well as tax cut expiration dates get pushed further into the future. Likewise, some of the spending cuts expected to occur in the "Extended-Baseline Scenario" do not occur for obvious political reasons.

As you can see the overall spending in this scenario grows just like the other one but the revenue line holds at 18%.

Thus, the key facts:
(1) Spending will go up in either scenario. The baseline scenario goes up slightly less compared to the alternative scenario probably because the alternative scenario assumes some promised spending cuts don't actually happen.

(2) Revenue as % GDP rises in the baseline scenario while it doesn't in the alternative scenario.

Is the rise in taxes assumed in the baseline scenario realistic?

Historically, how much taxes have we paid?

That is shown in the graph below.

Tax revenue has been remarkably flat in the last 40 years. It has been as low as 15% of GDP due to the recent economic downturn combined with tax cuts to try to revive the economy. It has been as high as 20% during the boom time of the 90s just before the double hit of recession and 9/11 in 2001.

Thus, the "Alternative Fiscal Scenario" that assumes ~ 18% GDP tax revenues is historically realistic.

Key policy question:
(1) Does the Federal government back off on the spending to match the more historically realistic revenue behavior of the last 40 years?
(2) Or does the Federal government go on a full-court press to explain that taxes need to rise in order to pay for the promised health benefits which account for the bulk of the growth of the government in the decades ahead?

Technology: Digital Radio

2011-07-08T23:19:00.000-07:00

We all know about digital TV. A little while ago, the USA made the transition to digital only signals. Thus, all the old analog TVs became non-functional unless one connected a digital converter box.

Little did I know until recently there is a transition to digital radio taking place.

For the moment, analog signals will continue to be transmitted with the digital signals.

This process is also occurring in many other countries with each region adopting their own technology standard.

I have bought one of these gadgets to hear the new technology in action.

Pros:
The sound quality is indeed excellent.
The text information on the display can be informative.
The parallel channels are fun to pick up.

Cons:
The device is somewhat expensive though I would imagine audiophiles with nice stereo setups would enjoy the options available.
Though the number of stations broadcasting with digital signals is expanding, in practice there are only of handful of stations I like to listen to. Some of them haven't gone digital or if they have, the signal strength is insufficient such that the reception defaults to analog.

Outlook:
Radio devices are quite durable, I wonder how often does the average person buy a new radio?

When one does enter the market for a new radio, unless one is an audiophile wanting top notch sound or someone interested in new tech gadgets (like me), the price differential is a barrier to buying a digital capable unit.

Given that much radio listening is done while doing housework, working in the garage, or puttering around the yard, the quality of sound a digital signal could generate may not be worth the extra expense.

Thus, digital radio will remain niche until the price comes down substantially.

Non-profit of the month: July 2011 - Arise Africa Kershaw Challenge

2011-07-08T22:45:00.000-07:00

Arise Africa is a non-profit started by some young Americans who wanted to do something to serve the people of Africa.

It isn't a big group but it is taking practical steps to serve.

I heard about the organization because as a Dodger fan, I get occasional email notes about what is happening with the team off-the-field in addition to the usual game updates.

In what has been a tough year for Dodger fans, one bright spot has been Clayton Kershaw, the ace of the pitching staff.

But my respect for him is heightened mostly because of one of his off-the-field commitments that has come to my attention.

His wife, Ellen had been a part of Arise Africa in her college years. During the off-season, after their wedding, they went together to participate in some of the work taking place there. As a result, upon their return, they set-up the Kershaw Challenge to raise funds for an orphanage.

I'm "pitching" in by donating to the cause and hope you will "step-up to the plate" too! 8-)

Politics: "Kinder and gentler" political rhetoric ... not ...

2011-07-07T08:50:00.000-07:00

Geraghty points out latest from POTUS.

Quote emphasis by Geraghty:

President Obama, yesterday: "I’ve asked leaders of both parties and both houses of Congress to come here to the White House on Thursday so we can build on the work that’s already been done and drive towards a final agreement. It’s my hope that everybody is going to leave their ultimatums at the door, that we’ll all leave our political rhetoric at the door."

President Obama, today: "The debt ceiling should not be something that is used as a gun against the heads of the American people to extract tax breaks for corporate jet owners, for oil and gas companies that are making billions of dollars because the price of gasoline has gone up so high."

Theology: Re-imagining the American Experience

2011-07-04T10:10:00.000-07:00

What are the virtues of the American story?

I think Dennis Prager puts it pretty well in the video item below.

To summarize:
Liberty
We are free to pursue our dreams and to go as far in life as hard work and good luck will take us.

E pluribus unum
“From many, one.” Unlike other countries, America is composed of people of every religious, racial, ethnic, cultural and national origin. Out of many people we become one people – Americans.

In God we trust
America was founded on the belief that our rights and liberties have been granted to us by the Creator.

America is far from a perfect place and we have our share of troubles. However, these virtues have meant a great amount to our country and has helped build much good in it.

However, the clear weakness of America in recent decades has been the over-emphasis on the accumulation of wealth and the willingness among some to break rules to do so.

As a follower of Jesus, how might I re-imagine the American narrative bringing it under the Lordship of Christ?

I found myself drawn to St. Paul's letter to the Galatians.

If we speak of liberty as a virtue then we who call Jesus Lord need to heed the following:
Galatians 5:13
You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love.

If we acknowledge "e pluribus unum" and the great melting pot of America, then we must rise to the challenge of loving our neighbor who may or may not share our religious or political beliefs nor share common cultural traditions or personal interest. As St. Paul put it bluntly:
Galatians 5:14-15
For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

And finally, if in God we trust is to have its fullest expression in us as followers of Christ then we need to yield totally to the Spirit.
Galatians 5:16-17, 22-23
So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

The "spirit of the age" has made the acquisition of wealth the central aim. We need the antidote that an attitude of service, the priority of love and the working of the Holy Spirit can provide.

As we celebrate July 4 and the founding of America, let us do so with thanksgiving but also prayerfulness for our citizenship is to the even higher calling of the Kingdom of God!

Culture: Putting the American Dream on the Psychologist's Couch

2011-07-04T09:27:00.000-07:00

I suppose every culture has a heroic narrative of itself. It can be reflected in their national anthems or in their unofficial anthems.

For the British, it probably would be "Jerusalem."

For Americans, it can be any number of songs like "God Bless America," "America, the Beautiful," Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA," or Neil Diamond's "Coming to America."

Conversations about the merits of the American Dream and the idea of American Exceptionalism have been made difficult by binary thinking: America is the Great Satan or America is a Christian Nation.

Like most things in the world, America is a mix of good and bad.

But having said that, America is pretty unique as a beacon of liberty (economic and religious) such that people for centuries have taken great efforts to immigrate here.

Also unique is the melting pot of America where in many parts of the world such a mix of ethnic groups and religious ideas would lead to outright fighting in the streets.

And finally, the notion that humans have rights given by a Creator has propelled America forward in advancing freedoms here in the USA and the nation's willingness to support freedom in other parts of the world.

Here below is a video describing the above three ideas of "liberty," "e pluribus unum" and "in God we trust."

Happy Birthday America!

Business: How price controls can make things worse

2011-06-30T21:40:00.000-07:00

Cindy's Chicken Coop raises chickens for food at the cost of $1/chicken.

She sells them at $2/chicken to Mary's Market and the profit is her annual income. She raises and sells about 50,000 chickens a year thus she makes $50,000 a year before taxes.

Mary's Market then sells them to you for $4/chicken.

That is how the free market system works.

The government may send the occasional inspector to Cindy's Chicken Coop and they will visit Mary's Market as well.

But what if the government institutes price controls arguing: chickens are essential to the health and well being of our citizens and the people must be protected from the profit taking Cindy and price-gouging Mary.

Therefore, Mary's Market must sell chickens at $2 and if the inspector finds the prices higher Mary will be fined or imprisoned or both.

Mary goes to Cindy and says, can you sell me your chickens for $1.50 a piece?

Mary also starts looking into selling other kinds of products that aren't price controlled to keep her business afloat.

Mary starts looking into chicken farms that may sell her chickens for less than Cindy.

Cindy has to decide, do I see my profits cut in half? Or do I give up raising chickens for a living?

Cindy decides to give up her chicken business and find another line of work.

Mary finds that George sells chicken for the $1.50 price but he makes most of his money selling corn. Thus, his farm isn't set up to raise as many chickens as Cindy so Mary's Market is constantly short of chicken.

Thus, the chicken shortage was caused by the government instituted price controls driving Cindy out of business. The opposite of what the price control was intended to do which was to make chicken available at more affordable prices.

The chicken shortage has gotten dire and people are demanding chicken and will go to great lengths to get chicken. The shortage is so extreme that Michael decides to set up a chicken coop and he brings them to market himself in a truck he parks down the street from Mary's Market. He sells chicken for $8 each (4x higher than the government regulated price). When he sees the inspector coming, his drives off avoiding the fines. The people buying from Michael ask why he charges so much? He explains, "if I get caught I have to pay a fine which has happened on several occasions so I use the profits to pay for those fines." He also explains some of his profits go to paying bribes to inspectors who will look the other way and not issue him a citation.

In the more extreme scenario, not only does the price control result in shortages it can result in black market prices that may be higher than what they would have been without the price control!

Business: Are hybrid vehicles economical?

2011-06-30T18:29:00.000-07:00

Short answer: it depends.

Assumptions:
Regular car getting 25 miles per gallon
Hybrid car getting 40 miles per gallon
Utilizing the vehicle for 100,000 miles
Gasoline costing $4 per gallon
Comparable repair costs
Comparable insurance costs

The hybrid car saves $6000 in fuel costs.

Change the assumption of gas to $5 per gallon and the hybrid car saves $7500 in fuel costs.

At the moment, hybrid vehicles cost more than regular vehicles. Thus, fuel savings may or may not balance the initial purchase cost.

Also, I don't know if the repair costs and insurance costs are actually identical.

Non-profit of the month: June 2011 - UCLA

2011-06-28T09:43:00.000-07:00

Budgets are tight all around. It is impacting college education just like everywhere else.

The political mantra among some is that everyone should get a college education and mechanisms should be put in place (i.e. tax dollars in direct aid or loans) to facilitate it. Indeed, getting a college education does open up doors of opportunity. However, not everyone may benefit or need a "4-year" style college education. There is the whole realm of trade schools that provide focused education in specific areas to prepare people for particular types of jobs.

Nonetheless, I had the great opportunity to attend UCLA to get my degree in chemistry and biochemistry. And so this month, I made a contribution to UCLA's scholarship fund.

If you have benefited from a college education, please consider giving to your alma mater to support their efforts!

World: UBL raid reads like something from a Clancy novel

2011-05-02T13:24:00.000-07:00

Details continue to come out and am looking forward to a documentary, long-form magazine accounts and probable future books and movies on the raid that killed UBL.

But the big geopolitical question is how many in Pakistan knew UBL was there and how high up in the government?

In the article, the closing paragraph was:
This discovery and subsequent death of bin Laden doesn't bode well for the Pakistan government. According to Martin, it will be hard for the Pakistanis to explain how bin Laden could have been living in a huge compound located in a densely populated suburb filled with retired military unnoticed.

Indeed, it appears that UBL was hiding in plain sight and not out in some rural mountainous caves.

World: UBL is dead!

2011-05-01T22:19:00.000-07:00

Bin Laden killed just outside Islamabad by US special forces.

Details of the operation and the intelligence that led to the raid will undoubtedly be very interesting.

Highest commendations to the US armed forces and the intelligence teams that made this long awaited moment of justice possible.

Hats off to President Obama and his national security team that doggedly pursed UBL and their willingness to authorize this risky mission!

Sports: Being an LA Sports Fan

2011-04-26T09:31:00.000-07:00

Well, what can you say?

The Ducks and Kings were bounced from the NHL playoffs.

Of the six games the Kings and Sharks played, three went into OT indicating the two teams were pretty evenly matched. Not bad considering how the Kings had some late in the season injuries and pretty much limped to the finish line. Wait until next year!

Dodgers have been doing better on the field and perhaps with MLB trying to wrest control of the team from McCourt, things will get better off the field. Nonetheless, the Dodger brand has been badly tarnished.

Meanwhile, the Lakers could be nearing the end of their run with Kobe injured and the Lakers seemingly unable to summon the will to play a full 48 minutes against the upstart Hornets.

Politics: What are taxes for?

2011-04-25T12:14:00.000-07:00

Taxes serve three purposes:
1) Raise revenue for government purposes
2) Subsidize activities the government believes (rightly or wrongly) to be beneficial for society
3) Redistribute wealth

Redistribute wealth
Current workers pay Social Security taxes to pay benefits to retired individuals.
Current workers pay Medicare taxes to fund health care for the elderly.
High income earners pay income taxes that funds various programs that may or may not benefit them directly.

Subsidize activities
Are homeowners considered a special interest group?
One deduction in the tax code is interest payments to service a home loan. Thus, the tax code is subsidizing this activity.
Are workers who get health insurance from their companies special interests?
Health insurance benefits from employers are not taxes as salary. Thus, the tax code is subsidizing this activity.
Are people who donate to charity a special interest group?
One can deduct donations to IRS recognized charities. Thus, the tax code is subsidizing this activity.
Any deduction or credit one claims on the 1040 is a subsidization of that activity.

Raising revenue
Government taxes the people to raise revenue to spend it.

The debate needs to be on how many of the current functions are proper.

Government has proper functions in society. I don't advocate getting rid of all the discretionary spending portion of the budget but it could use a trim (e.g. agricultural and energy subsidies go to the politically connected while education and housing are rightly local matters).

We need to talk about the big dollars in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Defense.

Interest on the debt is big but you can't stop paying the interest on the debt without a calamity on the financial markets so you can't really do anything about that one except borrow less so that part doesn't keep getting bigger!

Defense needs to be trimmed (listen up GOP).

Social Security and Medicare needs to be trimmed and re-organized because we should not promise benefits for our seniors we can't realistically pay for (listen up Democrats).

Funding of Medicaid is morally defensible because that is for the poor (listen up GOP). However, the way its organized could use some work (listen up Democrats).

The debate also needs to be on whether the tax code should have so many credits/deductions to subsidize certain activities.

Most forms of taxation are FLAT and impact rich and poor alike. This is not true of the income tax.

As a practical matter, I think the income tax system should be tiered progressively (i.e. higher income pays a higher percentage). I think the cap on Social Security taxes (currently at $106,800) should rise and eventually be lifted. I think most credits/deductions should be phased out over time.

Taxes should be primarily about raising revenue for needed government functions and much less about subsidizing activities the government deems desirable.

Politics: Do the rich pay "enough" taxes?

2011-04-20T19:02:00.000-07:00

That is a question people often ask with the assumption the answer is, NO!

But the question does require two assumptions:
What is the definition of rich?
What is enough?

Thus, leaving aside "who is rich" and "what is enough" questions, what can we say about this taxing question?

This item suggests that the bulk (97.3%) of the income taxes are paid by those in the top 50% of the population. Looking at the other part of the bar graph, 58.7% of all income taxes are paid by just 5% of the population.

Thus, with regards to income tax, the rich do pay a large share of the taxes.

However, as any average working person knows, we also pay Social Security taxes and Medicare taxes.

Turns out Medicare tax is essentially a FLAT TAX on income for all employers/employees of 1.45% for employer and 1.45% for employee. Thus, the Medicare tax falls on all people equally.

However, the Social Security tax is a FLAT TAX on income up to $106,800 with 6.2% on employers and 6.2% on employees. Thus, for folks earning $106,800 or less, we are all taxed the same. But if one earns more than $106,800, those extra dollars are not subject to the Social Security FLAT TAX, thus the effective rate for them falls as they earn more.

Of course, someone earning over $106,800 is taxed in the 25, 28, 33 or 35% tax bracket depending on total income compared to the 10 and 15% bracket for the less well heeled.

Then there are SALES taxes levied at the state/county/city levels which hits all people. And there are PROPERTY taxes which hits all people who own homes. There are GAS taxes at the pump that are paid by anyone who drives. There are alcohol and tobacco taxes for those who partake.

There are specialized taxes on dividends and capital gains which are at rates in some cases lower than income tax rates. However, dividends and capital gains are generated by the purchase of mutual funds and stocks and other investment vehicles usually with income that has been taxed once already.

As you can see there are many tax mechanisms that the population pays: no one escapes the TAXMAN as described in the Beatles song.

And it turns out that most taxes are of the FLAT tax variety (i.e. as a percentage the same for everyone) with the income tax as progressive (i.e. higher rates for higher income) and social security tax as regressive (i.e. lower rates for higher income) above $106,800

The really big question is how much government do we want to pay for?

Revenues need to match expense. But since they don't, there is DEBT. This DEBT is paid out of future tax revenues and is a "tax" on future generations.

A secondary question is what types of tax systems to use.

The more complicated the systems, the more likely there will be honest mistakes, legal tax avoiding actions and outright tax evasion.

Theology: Passover and Easter, When?

2011-04-18T18:40:00.000-07:00

Saw this item today.

I knew that Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples prior to his death on Good Friday and Resurrection on Easter Sunday.

What I didn't know was that Matthew, Mark and Luke offered that description but that John stated that Jesus died on the day of preparation for the Passover (Friday) which results in a special Sabbath Saturday that was also a Passover remembrance.

Thus, it appears confusing and contradictory!

The article offers this explanation:
Humphreys' research suggests Jesus, and Matthew, Mark and Luke, were using the Pre-Exilic Calendar, which dated from the time of Moses and counted the first day of the new month from the end of the old lunar cycle, while John was referring to the official Jewish calendar of the day.
.......
If the Passover meal and the Last Supper did take place on a Wednesday it would help explain how the large number of events that the Gospels record between the Last Supper and the Crucifixion were able to take place.

With the help of an astronomer, Humphreys reconstructed the Pre-Exilic calendar and placed Passover in the year AD 33, widely accepted as the year of Jesus' crucifixion, on Wednesday April 1.

That means if modern Christians wished to ascribe a date for Easter based on Humphreys' calculations, which he has been mulling over since 1983, Easter Day would fall on the first Sunday in April.

If this analysis correct, Jesus celebrated Passover with his disciples as described in Matthew, Mark and Luke on a date (Wednesday) that was different then the establishment Jewish community of the time which celebrated it on Saturday which was what John was referring.

I look forward to seeing if some other scholars I check out on these theological matters agree with this proposed explanation.

UPDATE: Here you can hear Humphrey's explain in a BBC interview.

LA Scene: LA Phil's Importance of Being Earnest by Ades and Barry

2011-04-10T10:29:00.000-07:00

The review from the professional (LA Times Mark Swed) was positive.

The reviews from the comment's section of Mark Swed's report were mixed.

The fact that the concert hall was no where near full meant that many had voted with their feet by either not showing up for their subscription concert, trading out of it or not buying this show in particular.

We went with some trepidation. But as a subscriber since 1999, I had been exposed to some contemporary musical programs and had more often than not enjoyed them. Thus, we went with an open mind to see the show.

It was awful.

Imagine the sound of singers trying to sound like roaring lions? Or was that cats coughing? Or dogs choking? Imagine watching two musicians cracking plates in garbage cans and cranking wind machines. I had to wonder what the singers and musicians thought when they first got the music score? Do they actually like to do these kinds of programs? Or do they figure, well its a paycheck?

Below is the letter I am sending to the LA Phil.

April 9, 2011

Los Angeles Philharmonic
111 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Dear LA Phil,

I have been a subscriber since 1999 and my ticket package (currently FR3) has usually included one concert a season devoted to contemporary music. Over the years, more often than not, I've enjoyed those concerts. Thus, I'm not reflexively opposed to contemporary music. I have admired the astute judgement of your program planners that resulted in musical choices that “pushed the edge” without going over the edge.

However, last evening, the Ades-Barry project The Importance of Being Earnest was well over the edge. I recognize that when an organization commissions a work they must permit the artists considerable freedom to pursue their ideas. However, it should be noted that the “customers” can vote with their feet by leaving the performance or not showing up.

I did not know what to expect and came with an open mind. But within 5 to 10 minutes, a number of people started to leave the concert. We would have left as well except for the fact we didn't want to climb over a half-dozen people to get to the aisle. Suffice to say, we did not return for Act III.

Because of the high quality performances of familiar works and tasteful selection of less familiar and new works, the LA Philharmonic enjoys a vast pool of good will. However, such rapport with the subscribers and audience should not be taken for granted or abused. Hopefully, blunders like The Importance of Being Earnest will remain the exception.

Thanks for a mostly wonderful 2010-2011 season. I look forward to 2011-2012.

Sincerely,

The LA Phil has a clearly marked and labeled new music series called Green Umbrella.

I don't attend those because having heard some new music on the radio, I know I am not likely to enjoy or be interested in that type of programing.

Over the years, I have come to trust the LA Phil programing staff in regards to their music choices beyond the traditional Bach, Beethoven, Brahms and other crowd pleasing favorites that they mix in to the general subscription packages. Some have been quite enjoyable or at least thought provoking. Examples: Salonen's farewell concert, an Ades led concert, Concrete Frequency Festival, Stucky's Second Concerto for Orchestra.

Importance of Being Earnest was dreadful.

Non-profit of the month: May 2011 - KOCE

2011-04-08T16:13:00.000-07:00

With KCET breaking away from the PBS network, PBS retains its presence in Southern California through KOCE. Thus, I go to 50.1 to get my PBS Newshour, Washington Week, Nova, Nature and American Experience.

Whether you think PBS should get Federal funds or not, go support your local PBS station if you watch it.

My feeling is that PBS Federal funding should be reduced and used to support stations in rural areas where the support base is smaller. In big metro areas, viewer support should be adequate to carry the weight to keep them on the air.

Non-profit of the month: April 2011 - KCET

2011-04-08T15:52:00.000-07:00

Grew up watching KCET: Sesame Street, Mr. Rodger's Neighborhood and Nova.

As an adult, I enjoyed MacNeil-Lehrer Newshour, Wall Street Week with Louis Rukeyser, Washington Week in Review, American Experience documentaries and documentaries by Ken Burns.

Alas, KCET couldn't or wouldn't make a deal with PBS over financial issues so they have now become an independent station and lost access to a lot of the shows I enjoy on the PBS networks.

By all accounts, KCET is struggling financially even more so now.

Nonetheless, I still find my remote hitting 28.1 periodically because of Huell Howser and So Cal Connected and international news feeds on 28.4.

Therefore, I'll make a contribution to KCET.

Politics: Pick a number ... Rep. Ryan picked 20%

2011-04-06T09:51:00.000-07:00

It isn't rocket science: one must balance spending with revenue.

Rep. Paul Ryan selected revenue as 20% of GDP and proposes that spending go down to 20% of GDP.

Of course, he and his plan is being attacked! Shocking, eh?

Would those who oppose his plan please pick a number?

UPDATE: Below is a screen grab from a CBO analysis of Rep. Ryan's plan.

Looks like Rep. Ryan split the difference ... spending is almost 24% GDP and revenue at 15% GDP. The middle ground would be 19-20% bringing down spending 4-5% and bringing up revenue 4-5%.

We need to decide how much government we want. If we want government to be 30% of GDP (baseline scenario - wonder if that is what happens if nothing is done to current policy? Alternative scenario has spending greater than 40%.) then we need to have revenue rise (double) to more than 30% GDP to begin to pay for it and begin to pay down the accumulated debt.

Will his critics come up with a number?

UPDATE: Cato weighs in on his proposal. They feel it is positive step to begin the conversation on restraining spending. But they do have a few complaints. Excerpts:
Ryan doesn’t provide specific Social Security cuts ...
Would rather see Ryan’s Medicare reforms kick in sooner ...
Ryan adopts Obama’s proposed defense (security) savings, but larger cuts are called for ...
Ryan includes modest cuts to nonsecurity discretionary spending. Larger cuts are needed, including termination of entire agencies ...

UPDATE: Of course, in the confused language of Washington DC, draconian cuts (what they are saying of the Ryan plan) are actually not cuts but reductions in growth! This item at Reason of a segment on Bloomberg explains.

Politics: Just how much is $61 billion in cuts? Yet another view ...

2011-04-03T14:13:00.000-07:00

Imagine the hot dog vendor charges $3.81 but then says, "Hey, I'll cut my prices and sell it to you for $3.75, would you buy it now?"

That is what cutting $61 billion dollars from the US Federal budget is equal to on a percentage basis at the food truck on the construction site.

Technology: The Challenges of Green Energy

2011-04-01T13:16:00.000-07:00

The "PR" of Green Energy is very good: good jobs! clean energy! saves the US economy! saves the world!

Of course, most things are never quite as good as advertised.

Why would anyone want to throw cold water on Green Energy?

Well, the reality is that Green Energy bumps its head up against the laws of physics and it costs lots of greenbacks (dollars).

This item I found at the Cato web page is a reprint of an item in Forbes magazine.

Excerpt:
green energy is diffuse ... the entire state of Connecticut (that is, if Connecticut were as windy as the southeastern Colorado plains) would need to be devoted to wind turbines to power the city of New York.

Sad to say, the land footprint of a traditional power plant is much smaller than a wind farm. And building wind farms out in the ocean is very challenging and expensive. I wonder how many acres of solar panels would one need to match one good old fashioned natural gas power plant?

Excerpt:
it is unreliable. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine when the energy is needed. We account for that today by having a lot of coal and natural gas generation on "standby" to fire-up when renewables can't produce.

The CAL-ISO manages the electricity needs of California and they have cool graphs of what is happening on a daily basis. As one can see there are peaks and troughs from the wind and solar portions of the electrical portfolio.

As long as solar and wind account for only a small portion of the electrical generation portfolio and the system resource curves and demand curves don't get too close, one probably can live with those peaks and troughs. But when the lines get close, the electrical grid will need a more stable source of electricity; hence, backup generation capacity from gas and coal.

Excerpt:
once the electricity is produced by the sun or wind, it cannot be stored because battery technology is not currently up to the task. Hence, we must immediately "use it or lose it."

Without battery technology, the peaks and troughs of wind and solar will need backup generation in case of a power crunch.

The Green Energy movement is hesitant to embrace nuclear power for philosophical reasons and the practical radiation risk as highlighted in the recent problems in Japan. But nuclear doesn't produce greenhouse gases so in that sense it can be included in the green category.

Unfortunately, nuclear, in addition to the radiation risks, does pose some financial challenges too. Because of the radiation risks, plant design has to be very good thus nuclear has very high initial capital costs which this item over at Reason discusses.

Excerpt:
While the nuclear industry in the United States has seen continued improvements in operating performance over time, it remains uncompetitive with coal and natural gas on the basis of price. This cost differential is primarily the result of high capital costs and long construction times. Indeed, building a nuclear power plant in the United States has cost, on average, three times as was originally estimated.

Am not in the energy business but clearly there are some very big challenges out there!

Politics: Just how much is $61 billion in cuts? Another view ...

2011-03-31T18:31:00.000-07:00

Imagine a car with a sticker price for $38,190.

One salesman says, "I'll sell it to you for $37,580. Would you buy it now?"

That is what cutting $61 billion dollars from the US Federal budget is equal to on a percentage basis on an automobile dealership lot.

Politics: Just how much is $61 billion in cuts?

2011-03-31T18:26:00.000-07:00

The GOP has proposed $61 billion in cuts. The Democrats say that is too much. Looking at the figure suggests that both parties have their heads in the sand. Figure is from Cato Institute.

Faith: Randall Wallace at the National Prayer Breakfast

2011-03-26T08:48:00.001-07:00

Politics: Should public-sector unions have collective bargaining rights?

2011-03-05T06:14:00.000-08:00

At the moment, the Wisconsin public sector unions do but its Republican Governor and Republican members of the legislature want to remove that right.

Question: Do Federal workers have the right to collectively bargain?

Going to google ... many of the top website hits are people arguing with each other in blog discussion sites ...

Of sites that might be less heated and try to stick to the facts ...

It appears at the Federal level they do have some rights but national security workers appear to have limited rights according to this PolitiFact item. Excerpt:
Under the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act, all federal employees have the right to bargain collectively, but the president has the power to restrict those rights for employees working in the intelligence or national security fields.

At the state level, it appears to be the opposite in that this item posted in 2007 from the Heritage think tank seems to say that collective bargaining rights is widely available to public safety employees (i.e. police, fire, etc). Excerpt:
Thirty-four states already have collective bargaining for both police and firefighters. Four states extend collective bargaining privileges to firefighters but not police officers. In states without laws mandating collective bargaining, some local governments nonetheless do so. Other states authorize public employers to voluntarily recognize collective bargaining agreements, but do not require it.

In this Newshour item, David Brooks points out two difference between public sector and private sector unions which I've marked in bold. Excerpt:

I think, when a private sector union negotiates, they know their company can go out of business if they ask too much. That's not the state with a state monopoly. When the private sector negotiates, a private sector union, the management has an incentive to say no.

Here, the management has much less incentive. Most importantly, the public sector unions have a chance to help select the people they're negotiating with through their campaign donations.

And, so, they get to ask what they want. I perfectly understand that. But when it's slightly off-balance, then you get what you have got in 30 or 40 states, fiscally unsustainable situations. So, I think I'm not totally in agreement with what Scott Walker is trying to do, which I think is way too polarizing, but I do think the balance has to shift a little.

The multi-billion dollar question is how does one shift it back? The pension and benefit liabilities the states have to their employees are busting their budgets. Can it be done while leaving collective bargaining in place?

On a related note, Dennis Prager wonders how the media would cover the story if Tea Party people started camping out in a statehouse like the way the unions and their allies are doing in Wisconsin?

Theology: Does the Bible Support Same Sex-Marriage?

2011-03-04T07:06:00.000-08:00

According to Prof. Robert Gagnon, no.

In his piece, he addressed the question of analogies to slavery. Excerpt:
Scripture shows no vested interest in preserving the institution of slavery but it does show a strong vested interest from Genesis to Revelation in preserving a male-female prerequisite. Unlike its treatment of the institution of slavery, Scripture treats a male-female prerequisite for sex as a pre-Fall structure.

The Bible accommodates to social systems where sometimes the only alternative to starvation is enslavement. But it clearly shows a critical edge by specifying mandatory release dates and the right of kinship buyback; requiring that Israelites not be treated as slaves; and reminding Israelites that God had redeemed them from slavery in Egypt.

Paul urged enslaved believers to use an opportunity for freedom to maximize service to God and encouraged a Christian master (Philemon) to free his slave (Onesimus).

How can changing up on the Bible’s male-female prerequisite for sex be analogous to the church’s revision of the slavery issue if the Bible encourages critique of slavery but discourages critique of a male-female paradigm for sex?

Much closer analogies to the Bible’s rejection of homosexual practice are the Bible’s rejection of incest and the New Testament’s rejection of polyamory (polygamy).

Homosexual practice, incest, and polyamory are all (1) forms of sexual behavior (2) able to be conducted as adult-committed relationships but (3) strongly proscribed because (4) they violate creation structures or natural law.

Like same-sex intercourse, incest is sex between persons too much structurally alike, here as regards kinship rather than gender. Polyamory is a violation of the foundational “twoness” of the sexes.

The church I'm a member of is part of the PCUSA denomination that is currently voting on whether to alter the following language as a standard for ordination of ministers:

Those who are called to office in the church are to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church. Among these standards is the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness. Persons refusing to repent of any self-acknowledged practice which the confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and Sacrament.

If this standard is repealed, the new wording would make it likely that ordination of practicing homosexual pastors would be allowed.

Non-profit of the Month: March 2011- Cato Institute

2011-03-03T18:13:00.000-08:00

Tired of the talking-screaming heads on television news?

One of the places I go for thoughtful analysis of policy issues of the day is the Cato Institute.

Its a think tank in DC that often says the answer isn't a program based in DC.

From their "about" page:

Founded in 1977, Cato owes its name to Cato's Letters, a series of essays published in 18th- century England that presented a vision of society free from excessive government power. Those essays inspired the architects of the American Revolution. And the simple, timeless principles of that revolution — individual liberty, limited government, and free markets — turn out to be even more powerful in today's world of global markets and unprecedented access to more information than Jefferson or Madison could have imagined. Social and economic freedom is not just the best policy for a free people, it is the indispensable framework for the future.

Non-profit of the Month: February 2011- Americares

2011-03-03T18:09:00.000-08:00

When a disaster strikes somewhere in the world, only a handful of agencies have the size and know-how to get help in fast.

Americares is one of those organizations.

From their "about us" page:

Since our founding in 1982, AmeriCares has provided more than $10 Billion of aid to 147 countries. To accomplish these results, AmeriCares assembles product donations from the private sector, determines the most urgent needs and solicits the funding to send the aid via airlift or ocean cargo to health and welfare professionals in the indigent locations. The model is time tested, cost effective and experience driven. Historically, for each $100 donated, AmeriCares delivers more than $3,500 in emergency relief and humanitarian aid, including medicines, medical supplies, clothing, blankets and nutritional supplements.

AmeriCares has a longstanding commitment to fiscal responsibility and has consistently received high rankings from Charity Navigator for our efficiency. These ratings reflect the fact that more than 98% of our overall expenses directly support programs and relief for people in need – and just under 2% represent administrative costs.

Non-profit of the Month: January 2011- Union Rescue Mission and Venice Family Clinic

2011-03-03T18:06:00.000-08:00

Starting the year off with a local flavor. I've mentioned them before but I'll mention them again because I am supporting these long time organizations that have been doing good working in the City of Angels. Hope you will do the same!

Union Rescue Mission

From their "about" page:

Established in 1891, URM is one of the largest rescue missions of its kind in the United States and the oldest in Los Angeles.

We provide a comprehensive array of emergency and long-term services to our guests, including: food, shelter, clothing, medical and dental care, recovery programs, transitional housing, legal assistance, education, counseling, and job training to needy men, women, children, and families.

Venice Family Clinic

From their "clinic in brief" page:

Founded in 1970 in a borrowed storefront dental office, the Clinic has grown into the largest free clinic in the nation. Founder Phillip Rossman, MD, and co-founder Mayer B. Davidson, MD, called upon friends and colleagues to help. That spirit of volunteerism prevails today with more than 2,000 volunteers and $12.1 million in-kind contributions from hospitals, laboratories, specialty-care providers and pharmaceutical companies.

The Clinic provides comprehensive primary health care, specialty care, dental care, mental health services, health education and child development services, as well as public insurance enrollment to more than 24,400 patients, including more than 6,000 children, who make over 103,000 visits annually. Prescription medicines are provided at no charge.

Politics: Can you cut $100 billion from the Federal Budget?

2011-02-26T10:01:00.000-08:00

According to Wikipedia the US government spent $3.55 trillion in 2010.

I don't think there is an actual 2011 budget on the books as of this writing.

So I can only use the 2010 numbers to try to cut $100 billion.

It should be noted that cutting $100 billion (considered drastic by the people in DC) still leaves the budget over $1,000,000,000,000 in the red.

Anyway, right now, neither party will touch the "mandatory" programs and the Republicans won't touch defense. Thus, the cuts have to be made from everything else. Note the debt can't be cut because if one doesn't pay one's debts one is in default which would result in major chaos in the financial markets.

As you can see, 14% across the board cuts would be needed to reach the target.

But what if everything except the debt was on the table?

Here is my attempt to make cuts:

Rationale

Start with 2% cuts on the premise ALL must give up at least a little.
Medicare - turn the program into vouchers
Medicaid - turn program to block grant to states
Other mandatory - I wonder what these are? But in the effort to have shared sacrifice they too take a small hit
Social Security - alter the benefit calculation so it is 2% less generous
EPA and Interior - we do need to protect the environment and natural places
DOJ - law enforcement is a proper government function
VA - our veterans need medical care
HHS - programs for public health and medical research are in this department

4% cuts
Treasury and Labor - they also have some law enforcement functions
Agriculture - the farm subsidies should take a hit but the food stamps and other social services for the poor should take a smaller trim

6% cuts
DHS and Defense - security is a proper government function but some gold plated weapons systems could be trimmed and homeland security probably has some overlap and fat
State - cut some foreign aid to get some savings
DOT - infrastructure work is needed but the Amtrak subsidies and the high speed rail projects are doubtful

8%
Commerce - its a real grab bag of programs which can be trimmed
NASA - if we don't fly humans into space we can really save money
DOE - are corn ethanol subsides in this department? Energy subsides and research projects are a result of lobbyists from those industries which need to be trimmed.

10%
HUD and Education - long known for wasteful spending and probably better handled at the state and local levels

12%
Others - there is probably a plethora of programs that don't fit into neat categories that could be trimmed.

To save even more money look at the ambitious (probably too ambitious) effort at Downsizinggovernment.org.

The sad part is even with $130 billion in cuts, my proposed budget is still over $1 trillion in the red! To actually balance the budget, one needs 30% across the board cuts or corresponding tax increases or a combination of both. That is how out of balance the budget is right now.

Science: How much vitamin D to take?

2011-02-02T09:16:00.000-08:00

Recently, the Institue of Medicine issued a report on vitamin D.

Some in the research community disagreed with their recommendations.

Disclaimer: My research projects are in the realm of assessing the role of vitamin D on immunity. I personally take 2000 IU/day.

Politics: Health Care Bill, where the Dollars go?

2011-01-20T20:58:00.000-08:00

A helpful article on where the cost is.

Health care is valuable and helping more people gain better access is a good thing.

However, is this the best way to do it?

The "how" question is where there is a difference of opinion.

It is a national shame that so many people have a hard time with our health care system. No question we need to spend money to do better but are we spending it wisely in this new health bill?

We need to recheck our assumptions about some of the solutions that have been passed. Good intentions are not enough.

As in previous posts, I'm a big fan of vouchers (part I in the bill according to this article). It puts $$$ in hands of people who need it to buy health insurance. My guts tell me that is the part of the bill that should be protected. But many of the other provisions that come with it place too much power into the hands of too few regulators in DC. That is the part I think is upsetting people.

If anything, my assessment is that the states should have the option of converting their Medicaid and CHIP programs (section II of the health bill as summarized in the article) into voucher programs and see if that works better.

As for part III, a truly radical reform would be to decouple insurance from employment by phasing out the tax sheltered status of insurance benefits. That simple but dramatic shift in policy would level the playing field for small businesses in a more clear cut fashion that providing them tax credits and puts more control into the hands of the individual.

There will always need to be some social safety net because a certain segment of the population will fall through the cracks. As an honorable society, we need to own that duty.

But also, we need to own up to our duty to look closely at our health care system rather than continuing to let more power flow to DC. For the vast majority of Americans, we need to request that the government provide that safety net for those who truly need it and give the rest of the people the options and flexibility that will shrink as the regulatory power of the government grows in the health care industry.

Life: Remembering the I have a Dream Speech

2011-01-18T10:06:00.000-08:00

Simply wonderful!

Students recite portions of MLK's famous speech at the Lincoln Memorial.

Devotional Thoughts: Thinking about the Puritans

2011-01-15T11:24:00.000-08:00

What do you think of when you think of the Puritans?

I think of the Puritans coming to America and the courage it took to cross the sea and try to scratch out a new life in the New England colonies. In that regard, I admire them.

Of course, there are the negative connotations of the word puritanical.

Its a given that any group will have its successes and excesses.

But what did they believe about their faith?

One of my reading goals for the year will be to work my way through this book that excerpts some of their writings. The book also gives a brief sketch of the historical context of the Puritan movement and short biographies of the writers of the excerpts contained in the book.

What I'll do here for blog posts is to share a tidbit here and there.

According to the book, the English Puritans (1560-1710) sought reform of the Church of England. The Westminster Confession and Catechisms (1647) that are still widely respected today was strongly influenced by Puritan theological perspectives. Alas, their drive for reform took a setback with the Act Of Uniformity (1662) that resulted in the expulsion of most Puritan clergy. Nonetheless, their ideas endured even though they lost official status within the church.

Lord help us in the modern world to learn from the best of the past. Taking in what is good and true and beautiful for those things stand the test of time. Amen.

Money: Final Four Stock Picks

2011-01-14T21:35:00.000-08:00

Disclaimer: not in the financial planning business, investments can and do lose money, and this is offered as opinion and does not constitute advice for your specific financial situation, etc.

SYT
What?
Agribusiness based in Switzerland.
Why?
People have to eat and this company is one of the big players on the world stage.

CSCO
What?
Internet hardware.
Why?
The internet is going to keep growing and this company is one of the top companies in that industry.

DUK
What?
Electrical utility.
Why?
Great dividends and people need electricity and this is one of the biggies that is well-run.

VZ
What?
Telecom.
Why?
Great dividends and by all accounts VZ's cellphone coverage beats everyone else in the USA and they just got rights to sell iPhone. This could be good in getting more customers but it could be bad if their network gets clogged!

Life: Sal Giunta, Medal of Honor Recipient

2011-01-13T18:14:00.000-08:00

Thank you Sgt. Giunta for your service.

And thank you to all who serve to protect freedom and freedom living people around the world.

Politics: Immigration Reform

2011-01-12T21:12:00.000-08:00

As in health care reform, some claim to want "comprehensive" immigration reform.

Call me a skeptic about "comprehensive" solutions. I don't have a lot of confidence that a bunch of experts can dream up a system to handle really huge problems. Perhaps, a more modest approach would be helpful.

In the case of immigration reform there are several issues and perhaps it is best to address them one-by-one rather then trying to "shoot-the-moon" with a comprehensive solution/reform. From what I have gathered, these are the distinct aspects of overall immigration question:
(1) Shortage of high skill labor.
(2) Shortage of low skill labor.
(3) Illegal immigrants who are already here.
(4) Border security.

Issue #1
High tech companies need highly skilled workers and they complain the US doesn't produce enough scientists, engineers, programmers, etc. They want to hire those kinds of workers from overseas and are unable to hire enough because the quotas are quickly filled up. I wonder where the political opposition comes from on this issue? Why not allow the best and the brightest to come here to work with the option of citizenship down the road? I suppose there could be some who are security risks but I would imagine a company doing the hiring would be highly motivated to avoid that kind of problem.

Issue #2
Illegal immigration which is down right now due to bad economic conditions in the USA will rise again when the economy recovers. As it is, some low skill jobs are filled by illegal immigrants. Why not bring them into the legal system by offering some kind of temporary workers program? Thus, companies can hire people in a legal manner and those illegals who want to be law abiding have the option. Again, down the road, some of these could be put on the citizenship track.

Issue #3
Apparently there are a number of people who have been in the USA for a long time but have lived in the shadows as illegal immigrants yet in all other ways have been law abiding contributing members of the society. The Dream Act was supposed to provide a path to citizenship for those who enter military service or obtain a college education. Hopefully, that plan can be re-visited.

Issue #4
The sad reality is that as long as Mexico teeters on economic collapse and drug lord violence, people will make the dash across the border with the risks that involves. As I see it, this goes hand-in-hand with issue 2. Tighten the border but also have the valve of a temporary workers program. This would provide incentives for compliance with legal mechanisms of immigration and employment.

Politics: Blood Libel and Palin and Current Climate

2011-01-12T16:04:00.000-08:00

Palin uses the phrase "blood libel" and the political world goes bananas. Alas, the phrase has been used on many other occasions by people on both the left and right. Perhaps the term is overused but the outrage over Palin sounds like "heads I win, tails you lose."

UPDATE: More uses of blood libel cited.

Memo to both sides: calm down and chill out.

Sadly, I had a feeling that the political dialog in the USA was going to go even further downhill when I first heard the horrible news about the shootings in Arizona. I heard the story on KNX1070AM radio here in Los Angeles. As part of the coverage, Orange County Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez was contacted. The interview began with Ms. Sanchez describing her relationship with Congresswoman Giffords as they served on some committees together in the House. From these comments I had a very good feeling about Ms. Giffords and all subsequent stories about her I have heard since support the perspective that she was one of the bright young stars in the House.

The reporter then asked, do you think the climate of political discourse in the country caused this event?

At this point Congresswoman Sanchez could/should have said, we are just a couple of hours after these horrendous shootings and we know nothing about the gunman. Our attention should be on praying for and comforting the family and friends of those impacted by this horrible situation. Law enforcement officials are investigating the gunman and we will all know more later. But for now, let's remember those who are hurting right now and praise the first responders who did their jobs so well in tending to Congresswoman Giffords and the others wounded today.

Instead, Ms. Sanchez politicized the shootings and blamed the rhetoric of the opponents of her political party.

As I heard her go on about this for a couple of minutes I knew the tone of the next few days was going to be poisonous.

Politics: Repeal and replace?

2011-01-07T10:01:00.000-08:00

Of course it won't actually happen. The House could pass a repeal bill and it will die in the Senate.

But as a thought exercise, what would a "replace" look like in my opinion as a pajama wearing blogger?

People say, we need a "comprehensive" solution to the problem of health insurance availability.

But that presumes a solution from DC is the best solution. The problem is that too much power is consolidated into the hands of a few regulators in DC.

Realistically, the health care system in very rural North Dakota is going to be somewhat different than a more urban state like New Jersey. As such, right now, health insurance is regulated at the state level.

So, how does one develop policies that help the people in the upper right quadrant of the matrix?

What about block grants to the states for the states to use in any combination of the following manners:
(1) To expand their current Medicaid program
(2) To expand or create government run hospitals and clinics to provide care to the underserved, uninsured and underinsured
(3) To expand or create a voucher program to help people buy health insurance who currently can't afford it.

Thus, the people of rural South Dakota (less than 1,000,000 people) can look at their situation and decide which of these methods actually helps the most people. Their solution might be very different than California (38,000,000 people with ginormous urban areas).

How to fund?

The just passed health bill has a mix and match of taxes and fees that essentially picks winners and losers among various industries and groups of people. More fair and effective is a broad based tax since any general public good should be paid for by the widest possible tax base. The tax could be indexed to income groups so higher income groups pay a bit more and lower income groups pay a bit less.

The problem of the bottom left group!

Initially, I was hesitant to support the idea of an insurance mandate. But I'm beginning to shift my view on that especially if the mandate is imposed at the state level much as the auto insurance mandate is controlled at the state level. The state governments already have records of companies licensed to sell health insurance in their states so they are in the best position to verify compliance.

And finally, the most radical reform ... in exchange for lower over all income tax rates remove the tax sheltered status of insurance premiums. Companies will still offer a menu of insurance plans but employees will now have a more complete understanding of the cost of the coverage they buy. Competition works best when the true cost of something is more apparent. With the lower tax rates they have more money in their pockets to decide which plan they want to enroll in.

Non-Profit of the Month: December 2010 - Orthopaedic Hospital

2010-12-31T22:48:00.000-08:00

Who is responsible for helping the helpless?

We are ... those of us who can help.

I wonder how many hospitals were built on that simple idea?

One such hospital in Los Angeles is the Orthopaedic Hospital.

It was founded in 1911. Below is an excerpt from their story:

Orthopaedic Hospital was founded by Charles LeRoy Lowman in 1911, beginning as a clinic for children with crippling disorders. Ever since, it has provided this care regardless of the family's financial circumstances. To support this mission, the Los Angeles Orthopaedic Hospital Foundation was established in 1917. Following that, in 1922 the first hospital completed construction. It was replaced by the second in 1959, and today the third is under construction. This new state-of-the-art facility is a cooperative effort with the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as part of a Master Strategic Alliance to create the Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center and Orthopaedic Hospital. Combined with the new Orthopaedic Hospital Outpatient Medical Center on our downtown Los Angeles campus and the Orthopaedic Hospital Research Center on the UCLA Westwood campus, these facilities have the capacity to lead advancements in musculoskeletal patient care, research, and education world-wide.

I wonder what would happen if more Americans with the same kind of vision as Charles LeRoy Lowman stepped up and got strong community support?

Would we need Washington DC to "reform" health care?

Please look around your community and see if there is a hospital or clinic or organization that helps provide health care to people in need and find a way to support their efforts!

Happy New Years and all the best in 2011!

Devotional Thoughts: Jesus is the Christ

2010-12-26T06:40:00.000-08:00

Christmas is about Jesus born into this world to be the Christ.

The full meaning of that is far more than words can tell. But words are all we have!

You might wonder, what did the earliest believers believe about Jesus?

Below is perhaps one of the more notable statement of who Jesus was and is:

Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death -
even death on a cross!
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

For us in the USA, it is easy to forget. We get busy with shopping, office parties and family gatherings. All of those things are good. However, amidst the hub-bub, let's remember who Jesus was and is. If you already acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ and the Lord, be sure to spend some time in humble adoration of the grace, love and fellowship made possible by Jesus. And if you haven't trusted in Jesus, please give it some consideration. Don't allow people who dismiss this simple ancient faith to sway you. Think it through for yourself. Talk to someone who follows Jesus. Visit a church that takes Jesus' seriously.

G.F. Handel's Messiah, track 53
Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
Blessing, and honour, glory and power, be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
Amen.

Merry Christmas where ever you are and have a great 2011!

Devotional Thoughts: The Messiah's Mission - take away the sins of the world

2010-12-25T06:41:00.000-08:00

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’ I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.”

Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. And I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ I have seen and I testify that this is God’s Chosen One.”

John the Baptist is described here. When he was in the womb, John "knew" there was something special about Jesus because when Mary, pregnant with Jesus visited Elizabeth, mother of John ... as soon as the sound of your (Mary) greeting reached my (Elizabeth) ears, the baby (John) in my womb leaped for joy.

However, in the intervening years, did John have his doubts?

After all, perhaps he encountered Jesus occasionally while growing up since their moms knew each other and he would have seen what probably was a fairly ordinary Jewish kid.

But then one day, Jesus came to John to receive baptism.

Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented. As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

Upon seeing this sign from God, John knew once again, there was indeed something special about Jesus.

G.F. Handel's Messiah, track 22
Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world.

Merry Christmas where ever you are reading this blog from!

Devotional Thoughts: Waiting for the Messiah

2010-12-24T07:47:00.000-08:00

Mary, Joseph and Jesus came to the Temple ...

There was also a prophet, Anna, the daughter of Penuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was very old; she had lived with her husband seven years after her marriage, and then was a widow until she was eighty-four. She never left the temple but worshiped night and day, fasting and praying. Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem.

Let's do the math: if she married as a teenager of say 16 which would have been common in that culture, then had 7 years with her husband; thus, she became a widow at 23. If she was 84 when she met Jesus, then she had been a widow of 61 years!

And now, whom she had waited to see arrived!!

One wonders what she said when she "spoke about the child to all?"

Simeon had spoken moments earlier to whom to most eyes would have been a fairly mundane mom and dad with their son,

Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
you may now dismiss your servant in peace.
For my eyes have seen your salvation,
which you have prepared in the sight of all nations:
a light for revelation to the Gentiles,
and the glory of your people Israel.

This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.

Perhaps Anna reiterated what Simeon said. Perhaps she explained further what Simeon meant. In any case, she could not be stopped nor contained as she spoke/preached/proclaimed "to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem!"

G.F. Handel's Messiah, track 9
O thou that tellest good tidings to Zion, get thee up into the high mountain; O thou that tellest good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, and be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!

Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.

Merry Christmas to you wherever you have mouse clicked from!

Devotional Thoughts: The Jesus Prayer

2010-12-21T10:49:00.000-08:00

In the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition, there is a practice known as the Jesus Prayer.

I've heard that it can be as short as:

Lord, have mercy.

And as "long" as:

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God, have mercy upon me, a sinner.

For classical music lovers, we hear the same thought in portions of liturgical music in the Kyrie. Here is an example in Gregorian Chant.

For a discussion of the history and practice of the Jesus Prayer, check out Frederica Mathewes-Green's essay on the topic.

I've taken to using the prayer at various times during a typical day.

Green put its benefit this way: Mostly, it gets rid of the clutter.

I definitely have my share of "squirrel moments" during a typical day!

And so the prayer helps me get settled.

More thoughts from Green ...

I think it is wise that the Prayer asks for mercy, to remind us of the necessity of humility, rather than the narcissism that can accompany the self-designation “spiritual.” So the Jesus Prayer is not an end in itself, but a way of training the mind to remain always in his presence, no matter what else life brings.

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God, have mercy upon me, a sinner.

Life: Living donations are not without risk - surgery is never without risk

2010-12-17T23:11:00.000-08:00

Interesting item at CNN.com about living donation of organs.

In some cases organs come from those who died who indicated a willingness to be a donor. In some cases the organ comes from a living person who is compatible to the recipient.

It should be said that transplanting a part of a liver is probably a bigger challenge than transplanting other organs. However, the reality is that in any organ transplant it is surgery and surgery is NEVER without risk. Of course, in the case of Laura Fritz, the donation saved the life of her mother but resulted in Laura nearly dying due to complications of the surgery.

6 years ago I had emergency surgery for a small bowel obstruction (SBO). The risk benefit calculation was that if nothing was done, the SBO could get worse and lead to the type of infection described in the CNN.com piece about Laura Fritz. By all accounts my surgery was uneventful.

However, since that surgery, I have been hospitalized three additional times for SBO. Fortunately, those episodes resolved without surgery. In a turn of medical irony, one side-effect of the surgical treatment for SBO is increased risk for future SBO.

My hat is off to those who willingly undergo surgery to donate an organ to someone. Having gone through surgery on an emergency basis, I'm not so sure I'd be willing to do so on a voluntary basis. I suppose knowing I might be saving the life of someone else would make the risk and pain worth it. I'd like to believe that is how I'd see it.

Economics: In defense of the drug companies

2010-12-16T21:06:00.000-08:00

Who discovers the medicines that save people's lives?

Drug companies who hire armies of scientists who work their butts off to find something that works.

Medical innovation is hard work.

Life: Are we beginning to forget 9/11?

2010-12-15T23:08:00.000-08:00

It is beginning to seem like ancient history in our 24/7 cyberspace linked fast paced world.

But it was only 9 years ago that 9/11 occurred.

The US held a day of prayer and remembrance after the attacks of 9/11. On that day, these words echoed in the National Cathedral and went out to all who watched and heard:

We are here in the middle hour of our grief. So many have suffered so great a loss, and today we express our nation's sorrow. We come before God to pray for the missing and the dead, and for those who loved them.
....
God's signs are not always the ones we look for. We learn in tragedy that His purposes are not always our own, yet the prayers of private suffering, whether in our homes or in this great cathedral are known and heard and understood. There are prayers that help us last through the day or endure the night. There are prayers of friends and strangers that give us strength for the journey, and there are prayers that yield our will to a Will greater than our own.

This world He created is of moral design. Grief and tragedy and hatred are only for a time. Goodness, remembrance and love have no end, and the Lord of life holds all who die and all who mourn.
....

Politics: One of the new voices of the GOP

2010-12-14T21:35:00.000-08:00

Rep.-Elect Kristi Noem (R-SD) speaks on the priorities of the incoming House Republicans.

World: Terrorism in Stockholm

2010-12-13T18:43:00.000-08:00

Not all bombings are performed by extreme Islamic individuals but many are.

Thus, eventually, the news reports confirmed such was likely the case in the bombing in a Stockholm shopping district this weekend.

Some people say that terrorism is driven by poverty. In some cases that is probably so. But time and again, we find out that the individuals often had what would be considered "normal lives" but turn out to be driven by extreme ideas.

The Telegraph of UK has a profile on the Stockholm suicide bomber. Excerpt:

It emerged last night that Abdulwahab, who was due to turn 29 yesterday, is a former physical therapy student at Bedfordshire University in Luton, and that his wife and three young children still live in the town.
.....
Tahir Hussain, 33, a taxi driver who lives nearby, said: “I used to see him around often. He didn’t say much but seemed nice. I used to see him walking with his kids.

“I was shocked when I heard what happened because I never thought he could do such a thing.”

Mr Hussain said that the couple had been living there for a year and that Abdulwahab used to go to Friday prayers at the Islamic Centre in Luton.

The BBC has an item on Taimour Abdulwahab al-Abdaly.
Excerpt:

"He had a bomb belt on him, he had a backpack with a bomb and he was carrying an object that has been compared to a pressure cooker. If it had all blown up at the same time, it would have been very powerful," he said.

A car containing gas canisters blew up first in a busy shopping street in the area of Drottninggatan at 1700 local time (1600 GMT) followed minutes later by a explosion in a street about 300m (985ft) away that killed the bomber.

Abdaly was named as the registered owner of the car.
......
Mr Lindstrand said Abdaly was completely unknown to Swedish security services before the blasts.

However, he pointed out: "He didn't live in Sweden; he lived in the UK. He left Sweden maybe 10 years ago."

The UK Guardian reported that the bomber clashed with some of the leaders of the Mosque he was attending.

Qadeer Baksh, chairman of Luton Islamic centre, said Abdaly showed up at the mosque during Ramadan in 2006 or 2007 and made an instant impression with his "very bubbly character" but they soon clashed over his views.

"We were challenging his philosophical attitude to jihad," said Baksh. "He got so angry that he left. He was just supporting and propagating these incorrect foundations [of Islam], so I stepped in."

He said Abdaly believed scholars of Islam were "in the pocket of the government" and proposed a "physical jihad".

Baksh said he thought he had talked Abdaly round to a more moderate position but the Iraqi-born Swede then came back with more arguments. "I had no idea it would escalate to where it escalated," said Abdaly. "I thought that when he stormed off he was just angry at me. I heard afterwards that he was criticising the mosque in general and me in particular at the university. He said we were working for the British government and that we were in the pocket of Saudi Arabia. He was trying to defame our honour."

Despite the clashes, Baksh said it was not for him to report Abdaly to the police or security services. "It's the police's job, the intelligence service's job to follow these people up, not ours," he said. "You can't just inform on any Muslim having extreme views. In the past many Muslims have had extreme views but have become good balance Muslims."

I have visited Stockholm on three occasions and on each of those trips, I walked around that shopping district where the bomber struck. And that is what terrorists want to do: to bring fear into day-to-day life and to kill the infidel (unbeliever).

In our interconnected world, it is getting harder and harder to think of the terrorist problem as being "somewhere else." All it takes is a motivated individual to strike. And at the same time, organized terrorists bands plot for dramatic attacks to maximize death and chaos.

They love death as much as we love life so they believe we will cower in fear.

We do love life but we will not cower in fear.

Politics: Tax and Spend - the numbers as percent GDP

2010-12-11T04:52:00.000-08:00

Lots of data at usgovernmentspending.com

Here are two charts I generated at their site that shows Federal tax as a percentage of GDP and Federal spending as a percentage of GDP while I have been alive.

As you can see taxes have been around 17.5% of GDP.

As you can see spending has been around 20% of GDP. However, currently, and for the next five year, it is projected to be consistently above 20% while taxes consistently below 20%.

It isn't rocket science: we want more government services than we are willing to pay for with taxes leading to deficits. We have to either cut services or raise taxes or some combination of both.

And so what are the government services?

See the pie chart.

Est for 2011 (total = $3.8 trillion)
Defense $928.5 billion
Health Care $898 billion
Pensions $787.6 billion
Welfare $464.6 billion
Etc...

Its nice to get tough on "earmarks" and "pork projects" but these four areas are where the pots of money are.

We either cut back on them, raise taxes or both.

Defense:
We either decide we aren't going to be the policeman of the world or we raise taxes and start selling war bonds to explicitly link our global security commitments to our pocketbooks.

Health Care:
We either have to ask the senior citizens to pay more in premiums and co-pays in the Medicare program or raise taxes on everyone else to pay for it or both. Ditto for Medicaid. But since Medicaid is for the poor, we really can't ask them to pay more in premiums so we need to raise taxes to help fund it. I do wonder if "voucherizing" the program will make it more efficient?

Pensions:
We have to look at raising the retirement age another year or two. We have to look at lowering the cost-of-living increases going forward and maybe even reduce benefits. We have to look at raising taxes on current workers to sustain the solvency of the fund.

Welfare:
We either have to raise taxes to cover these costs or we cut back on the benefits.

As the saying goes, "there is no free lunch."

A family can't buy steak if they only have a budget for hamburgers.

The Democrats want to tax the rich to pay for these programs but in the end there isn't enough money there to pay for all the programs so we run deficits.

The Republicans talk about cutting budgets and holding the line on taxes but in the end they don't really cut budgets and thus saddle future tax payers with the deficits.

UPDATE:
Reason.com says the magic number is cuts of 3.6% per year which will bring things in line in 10 years. They use a pork tenderloin roast to illustrate.

Politics: Health insurance coverage matrix

2010-12-10T05:25:00.000-08:00

One government study put the uninsured at 16 percent of the US population. This USA Today item puts the number at 46.3 million.

From this matrix, there are four groups of people:

Group 1
These people can afford insurance and buy it. It might be a strain on the budget but these people realize it is a good idea to have health insurance and thus try their best to buy it and do so.

Group 2
There are those who can't afford it but want to buy it. They want to be responsible but because of a combination of low income and high insurance premiums they are unable to buy. Some people in this category qualify for Medicaid and thus wind up in Group 1. But some don't qualify for Medicaid and can't afford health insurance.

Group 3
Some people actually earn enough money to buy health insurance but for whatever reason do not buy health insurance.

Group 4
Sadly, there are people who belong to this group who are unable and unwilling to buy health insurance.

Thus, the 46.3 million uninsured fall into one of the three categories of uninsured.

How does one help move people from the three other boxes into box one?

One idea of how to help the folks in the 3 uninsured boxes is to blow up the matrix and have the government run the whole thing. There are two ways the USA can do this:

(1) Nationalize health care providers
Just as the Federal government took over airport security in creating the TSA, the Federal government could directly hire and pay the salaries of health care professionals and run hospitals and clinics. An example of how this works in the USA is the VA medical system for the veterans.

(2) Nationalize health insurance
Under this approach, doctors and hospitals are paid from a government run insurance plan. We have some experience with this approach as Medicare is the USA nationalized health insurance for senior citizens. Also, Medicaid is a variant where Federal and States organize health insurance for the poor.

Thus, in the USA, some aspects of health care delivery and insurance are already nationalized and so some believe the nationalization should be extended so that all health care/health insurance be brought under one system.

However, for now, the question remains what will happen to health care as run by private entities. They are regulated at state and federal levels and the recent health bill expands those regulation.

I don't know how the regulatory climate compares to electrical utilities. One could make the comparison that both are essential services that should be heavily regulated and are. The debate is what degree of regulation.

If one retains private entities in the provision of health care, how does one address the 3 boxes of the matrix of uninsured?

One way is to provide vouchers to those who need help to buy insurance. Food stamps are essentially vouchers to buy food. Why not develop a program for the purchase of health insurance?

Instead of government agencies that run Medicare and Medicaid, why not trim their responsibilities to determining eligibility and issuing vouchers to those who qualify?

Of course to pay for those vouchers, the money committed to Medicare and Medicaid would have to be transferred to the voucher program and additional taxes might still be needed to cover people in group 2.

But what about group 3?

The stick of an insurance mandate may or may not survive legal challenge. But even if the mandates are eventually upheld, how does one enforce them? At what level of monetary fines will someone in group 3 decide to buy insurance? In the end, the uncompensated care provided to group 3 individuals is cost shifted to group 1.

As for group 4, they will remain in the realm of uncompensated charity care no matter what is done and their costs shifted to group 1.

Ultimately, even in a nationalized system, there is "cost shifting" because those who pay higher taxes are subsidizing those who pay less taxes. Thus, in my mind "cost shifting" is something that will always exist no matter what system is devised.

The dream of equal access to high quality health care is nice to strive for but unrealistic. The rich could always find a way to buy better services. Thus, the practical goal should be to design a system that maximizes access to a reasonable level of quality. Alas, the definition of reasonable quality is hotly debated.

Politics: Unintended consequences of new health bill (a.k.a. Obamacare)

2010-12-09T08:56:00.000-08:00

One of my friends who is an MD has taken a look at the health bill and points out some problems which I've tried to summarize below.

1. New mandates
Because there are additional requirements placed on health insurance policies being offered, the premiums have risen to pay for those new features. In the recent open enrollment at my work place, most plans showed a rise in monthly costs.

2. Dropped coverage
In some cases (mini-med plans), employers have had to drop coverage because those plans didn't measure up to the new regulations. Many companies have applied for waivers to keep offering these plans and have been granted temporary waivers by HHS. One wonders how many weren't granted waivers? Also, what will happen when the waivers expire?

3. Medical loss ratio
The new regulations require that insurance companies must spend 80-85 percent of their costs on patient care. He thinks this is a bad idea and explained it this way:

This "medical loss ratio" rule is like the government telling restaurant owners that 80 to 85 cents out of every dollar that the consumer pays must go to food that can "actually" be eaten by the consumer. That will, at least in theory, make sure that the restaurant owner will not overpay in his mortgages or spend money on unnecessarily expensive silverware. How much the owner pays the waitress or the electric company is also included in the "operation" side and not in the "food" side of the ratio. The business of serving food is food; hence it is entirely logical that 80-85% of what the consumer pays must go to actual food and not wasted on the "operation" of the business.

The unintended consequence of the "medical loss ratio" is that:
(A) the government decides what constitutes actual care increasing the regulatory power of the government; will explicit wage/price controls be next?
(B) some insurance companies will get out of the health insurance business leaving less choice for the consumer
(C) insurance companies will "overpay" for items that the government calls "actual care" so they can be in compliance with regulators.

Regulating the health insurance industry is a complicated thing. It may be well intentioned that insurance policies be required to cover more things but it costs money to do so and less robust but more affordable plans will get dropped. "Medical loss ratio" is one step removed from wage and price controls which is fools gold for "bending the cost curve."

Faith: Re-telling the Christmas Story

2010-12-06T22:05:00.000-08:00

Amidst the busy schedules of our lives and the reality that the story of Christmas has been diluted in our society, it was refreshing to see this video that simply re-tells the Christmas story!

The story teller is Keira, a child who was helped by the work of Union Rescue Mission.

When we think of the Christmas story, we often think of "no place at the inn." But looked at another way, some individuals in the community of Bethlehem provided space (may not have been much but they opened it) for Mary and Joseph so that Jesus could be born. They may not be recorded in the Gospels but that good deed would be recorded by God.

And so please consider supporting Union Rescue Mission or a like-minded organization in your local community that is helping those in need! You would be standing in a long line of people who have helped like those who did in Bethlehem.

UPDATE: Came across this item that discusses the "no place at the inn" feature in most our thoughts of the Nativity. According to Ben Witherington, a Biblical Scholar, a more accurate reading of the story is as follows:

When it came time for Mary to deliver the baby, the Greek of Luke’s text says--- “she wrapped him in cloth and laid him in a corn crib, as there was no room in the guest room”. Yes, you heard me right. Luke does not say there was no room in the inn. Luke has a different Greek word for inn (pandeion) which he trots out in the parable of the Good Samaritan. The word he uses here (kataluma) is the very word he uses to describe the room in which Jesus shared the last supper with his disciples—the guest room of a house.

Archeology of the area shows that houses in Bethlehem and its vicinity often had caves as the back of the house where they would keep their prized ox, or beast of burden, lest it be stolen. The guest room was in the front of the house, the animal shelter in the back, and Joseph and Mary had come too late to get the guest room, so the relatives did the best they could by putting them in the back of the house. Bethlehem was indeed a one stoplight town off the beaten track, and we have not a shred of archaeological evidence there ever was a wayfarer's inn in that little village in Jesus' day.

In other words, all this silliness about ‘no room at the Holiday Inn’ for the Holy family, is not at all what Luke is talking about. This is not a story about ‘no room in the inn’ or about the world’s giving Jesus the cold shoulder. It's a story about no inn in the room! It’s a story about a family making do when more relatives than expected suddenly show up on the doorstep. It’s a story most of us can relate to in one way or another. Jesus was born in his relative’s home, in the place where they kept the most precious of their animals. One can well imagine the smell in that room, and probably the shock of the Magi when they saw where the King was born.

Non-Profit of the Month: November 2010 - Union Rescue Mission

2010-11-30T08:43:00.000-08:00

Do you give money to the guy at the entrance to the store or at the corner of a busy intersection?

I've been told in many cases the money winds up on alcohol and drugs. As such, I generally don't give. But, sometimes I do.

I don't know what to do.

I think what gnaws at us is that it doesn't take too much to wind up as that guy on the street.

There are many worthy organizations in the LA area that tries to offer services to the down and out. I've tried to profile some in these "non-profit of the month" posts.

Today, I'll mention a group I've supported occasionally over the years: Union Rescue Mission.

Right now, in LA, there is some unseasonably cold weather and I'm sure the shelters are filling up with people trying to get out from the near freezing nights. Please consider supporting an organization in your area that is doing the work of compassion for those who have hit hard times for whatever reason.

Travel: Alaska Flag Song

2010-11-25T10:38:00.001-08:00

Music:
Alaska Flag Song performed by Adele Morgan

Travel: Denali Shuttle and Wildlife Viewing Bus

2010-11-25T10:36:00.001-08:00

Music:
Everlasting God performed by Lincoln Brewster

Travel: Alaska 2002 - Kenai Fjords

2010-11-25T10:33:00.000-08:00

Music:
Classical Gas by Mason Williams and Mannheim Steamroller
Title music to Northern Exposure by David Schwartz

World: Easiest to Describe, Hardest to Solve

2010-11-24T14:49:00.001-08:00

Dennis Prager offers his analysis of the Middle East problem.

Life: The Astronomical Numbers Associated with the Information Age

2010-11-24T09:44:00.000-08:00

HT: Nick W.

Politics: States (like Alaska) with lots of per capita Federal Aid ... stats can be deceiving ...

2010-11-23T20:40:00.000-08:00

Alaska has come under fire for receiving lots of Federal Aid.

Upon closer examination, the numbers are somewhat skewed by (1) the small population of Alaska and (2) some unique geographic and ethnic features of the state.

To see the amounts various agencies receive go to the Federal Aid to States page at the US Census.

No doubt, Senator Ted Stevens who died in a plane crash recently was effective at bringing Federal dollars to the state. Thus, that part of the story can't be denied.

But per capita statistics are tricky things.

A "pork project" going to a small state skews the numbers dramatically. Imagine a $70 million project's impact on per capita stats. For California, with over 35 million people, that project brings in a mere $2 per capita. But for Alaska with 700,000 people, that same project would bring in a whopping $100 per capita! California Senator Boxer would have to bring in 50 such projects to match the impact of just 1 such project brought to Alaska.

Thus, not surprisingly, at the top of the list of Federal Aid to the States are mostly small states. The 10 smallest states by population are all above the US average in per capita Federal aid.

However, are there other elements besides a low population that drives Alaska's per capita numbers?

There are three unique features to Alaska that appear to skew their stats: the high percentage of Native Alaskans in their population, the large area of wilderness and natural resources under Federal jurisdiction and the large land mass that impact transportation spending.

Native Alaskans

Alaska's native population (about 1 in 6 Alaskans) are assisted by three Federal programs: the Indian Health Service (IHS), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and educational programs for native populations (Education).
IHS $867 million
BIA $101 million
Education $32.9 million

Thus, about $1 billion in assistance is in programs for the native peoples of Alaska or $1430 per capita.

Many states have little or no funding in these categories because they have little to no native Americans.

Wilderness and natural resources

Alaska is well known for its natural wonders and resources which are administered by the Forest Service (FS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Dept of Interior's Fish and Wildlife service (FWS), Bureau of Land Managment (BLM), Minerals Management Service (MMS) and National Park Service (NPS).
FS $24.6 million
NRCS $4.5 million
FWS $41 million
BLM $26.7 million
MMS $42.6 million
NPS $1.5 million

Total: $140.9 million
Per capita: $201

How does that compare to California?

California received $282 million through these six agencies. Thus, $7.62 per capita.

Transportation

With a large land mass and corresponding airspace, Alaska received considerably funding through Dept of Transportation and in particular Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) funding.

Alaska received $720 million in DOT funds. $251 million of it through the FAA.

That comes out to $1029 per capita.

How does that compare with another small state?

Delaware, small in population (900,000) and land area, received $235 million in total DOT aid and $14.7 million in FAA funds. That comes out to $261 per capita.

How does Alaska's numbers compare to a big state in both land area and population like Texas (25 million)?

Texas received $3.6 billion in DOT funds with $281 million of it in FAA funds. Per capita: $144.

Thus, the greater than $5000 per capita in Federal Aid Alaska received which initially seems shockingly high becomes more understandable when one recognizes that Federal spending in the three areas described above ($2660 per capita) account for about one-half of the $5000 per capita figure.

One can debate whether those are Federal responsibilities or state ones. However, as it is, they are under Federal control. Thus, the news/opinion pieces highlighting the aggregate numbers which put Alaska in a bad light which upon further examination is not entirely justified.

Science: Contrarian views on Global Warming

2010-11-18T08:05:00.000-08:00

Saw this item about Bjorn Lomborg who believes global warming is occurring and that humans cause at least part of it. However, he is doubtful of the worst case scenarios proposed by some climate change advocates and thinks the money used fighting global warming could be better spent on other things.

Excerpt:

Lomborg believes that the world climate summits held in Rio, Kyoto, and Copenhagen over the last 18 years have been futile, because no country—especially such rising powerhouses as China and India, just now emerging into prosperity—will agree to cold-cock its economy in order to join the wispy Western global-warming crusade. And he claims that since the $250 billion the European Union spends every year to combat warming will ultimately reduce temperatures by only one-tenth of one percent, that money would be better channeled into worldwide battles against malaria and AIDS—diseases that are killing people right now—and into funding new climate technology.

Sports: Go LA Galaxy!

2010-11-08T15:33:00.000-08:00

The Galaxy defeated the Sounders!

They now advance to the next round against Dallas.

Last year, the Galaxy got to the championship but lost in penalty kicks.

They started off the season strong had a stretch where they were dismal but finished up strong.

Some experts were picking against them because they do have some older players.

But their surprisingly easy win against Seattle might get them some renewed attention.

Go Galaxy!

Politics: California is Republican on the issues of the day?

2010-11-03T22:56:00.000-07:00

If you use the ballot measures as an indicator of the perspective of California voters, they said ...

Yes: 20, 22, 25, 26
No: 19, 21, 23, 24, 27

Bold marks indicate matches between the party endorsement and how Californians voted.
The Libertarians
Yes: 19, 22, 23, 26
No: 21, 25
Undeclared: 20, 24, 27

The Greens
Yes: 19, 21, 24, 25
No: 23, 26
Undeclared: 20, 22, 27

The Democrats
Yes: 21, 24, 25, 27
No: 20, 22, 23, 26
Undeclared: 19

The Republicans
Yes: 20, 23, 26
No: 19, 21, 24, 25, 27
Undeclared: 22

Stunning isn't it?

Californians voted with the Republican recommended position in 5 of 9 races. Yet, no Republican won a statewide race in California last Tuesday.

Thus, it appears when you take away the "R" and "D" next to the item and vote purely on the issue like a ballot measure, California voters hold Republican views.

A ballot measure is about choosing yes or no about a given idea. In that situation, Californians were practical and voted very much in line with the Republican recommended positions.

But when one votes for a candidate, there are some feelings a voter has for "R" or "D" and for the specific candidate. In this situation, the California voter appears to be driven by something other than practicality.

What is the "meta-narrative" about voting "R" or "D."

What do you think?

Politics: Viral videos of the political mood and moment

2010-11-02T22:57:00.000-07:00

Top viral political videos according to CBSnews.com.

Regarding the House ... there was a large swing to the GOP ...

Regarding the Senate ...

The Democrats lost ground but retain control.

Over the past few years, academics have criticized the Senate’s "un-democratic" character, attacking the filibuster and even bemoaning the body’s very existence. So here’s the safest prediction of all: As the academics realize that the Senate provides opportunities for fighting the Republican agenda, the institution will suddenly regain their favor.

- John J. Pitney Jr. is Roy P. Crocker Professor of American Politics at Claremont McKenna College

Politics: Nov 2, 2010 Predictions - 51-49 Dems hold Senate, 60 seat gain for GOP in House

2010-11-01T12:36:00.000-07:00

No more political blog posts until after the election results come in!

So looking forward to being able to watch television or listen to the radio WITHOUT seeing or hearing political ADS!

Real Clear Politics probably has the best round-up around for all the races.

Senate races: I predict the Democrats hold on 51-49.
Sadly, it appears that California voters will be sending Boxer back to the Senate.

Call Me Senator from RightChange on Vimeo.

Hopefully, Nevada voters will indeed be wiser and send Reid into retirement.

As for the House, according to RCP, of the 435 House races only 44 are toss-ups. Thus, if RCP is correct, the Republicans will gain 45 House seats even if they lost every toss-up race. My guess is that in the end the Republicans will gain 60.

UPDATE: As of Wednesday afternoon: Senate 52-46 with 2 undecided. The Democrat leads in Washington and a Republican leads in Alaska. So the final will probably be 53-47. Meanwhile, in the House, the GOP gained 60 with 11 undecided.

UPDATE: Its a final, GOP gained 63 seats.