Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Happy Belated 100th Birthday Hubert H. Humphrey!
Excellent op-ed piece in the New York Times on Thursday on the 100th anniversary of the birth of Hubert Humphrey:
"His Balanced Growth and Economic Planning Act, introduced in May 1975, when unemployment was at a post-Depression high of 9 percent, proposed a sort of domestic World Bank to route capital to job creators. (It spoke to his conviction, in a knee-jerk, anti-corporate age, that pro-labor and pro-business policies were complementary.)
And at a time when other liberals were besotted with affirmative action as a strategy to undo the cruel injustices of American history, Humphrey pointed out that race-based remedies could only prove divisive when good jobs were disappearing for everyone. Liberal policy, he said, must stress "common denominators - mutual needs, mutual wants, common hopes, the same fears."
In 1976 he joined Representative Augustus Hawkins, a Democrat from the Watts section of Los Angeles, to introduce a bill requiring the government, especially the Federal Reserve, to keep unemployment below 3 percent - and if that failed, to provide emergency government jobs to the unemployed.
It sounds heretical now. But this newspaper endorsed it then, while 70 percent of Americans believed the government should offer jobs to everyone who wanted one."
The op-ed piece also talks about how we revered Ronald Reagan on the anniversary of his 100th birthday but forgot about Humphrey for his. Of course, Reagan being a former president had a lot to do with it. It also got me thinking though: many of today's conservatives hold up Reagan as an icon even though he provided amnesty to illegal immigrants and raised taxes during his presidency.
If Humphrey was held by progressives in the same regard, would his positions that are contrary to modern progressive views also be overlooked? The skeptic in me thinks that is likely so.
"His Balanced Growth and Economic Planning Act, introduced in May 1975, when unemployment was at a post-Depression high of 9 percent, proposed a sort of domestic World Bank to route capital to job creators. (It spoke to his conviction, in a knee-jerk, anti-corporate age, that pro-labor and pro-business policies were complementary.)
And at a time when other liberals were besotted with affirmative action as a strategy to undo the cruel injustices of American history, Humphrey pointed out that race-based remedies could only prove divisive when good jobs were disappearing for everyone. Liberal policy, he said, must stress "common denominators - mutual needs, mutual wants, common hopes, the same fears."
In 1976 he joined Representative Augustus Hawkins, a Democrat from the Watts section of Los Angeles, to introduce a bill requiring the government, especially the Federal Reserve, to keep unemployment below 3 percent - and if that failed, to provide emergency government jobs to the unemployed.
It sounds heretical now. But this newspaper endorsed it then, while 70 percent of Americans believed the government should offer jobs to everyone who wanted one."
The op-ed piece also talks about how we revered Ronald Reagan on the anniversary of his 100th birthday but forgot about Humphrey for his. Of course, Reagan being a former president had a lot to do with it. It also got me thinking though: many of today's conservatives hold up Reagan as an icon even though he provided amnesty to illegal immigrants and raised taxes during his presidency.
If Humphrey was held by progressives in the same regard, would his positions that are contrary to modern progressive views also be overlooked? The skeptic in me thinks that is likely so.
Friday, May 27, 2011
The Mets are New York's Most Beloved Team (according to a Yankee fan!)
Great blog post at The Bleacher Report by Harold Friend, a Yankee fan that believes the Mets are New York's most beloved team. This is my favorite part of the post:
"The low point, which illustrates the point that the majority of Yankees fans are front runners occurred on Sept. 22, 1966.
The last place Yankees played a rescheduled game against the Chicago White Sox. Hall of Fame broadcaster Red Barber told the television audience, "I don't know what the paid attendance is today, but whatever it is, it is the smallest crowd in the history of Yankee Stadium, and this crowd is the story, not the game."
There were 413 paying fans.
Barber asked the cameras to pan the empty stands. The head of Yankees' media relations refused."
Now THAT would have been really funny to see!
"The low point, which illustrates the point that the majority of Yankees fans are front runners occurred on Sept. 22, 1966.
The last place Yankees played a rescheduled game against the Chicago White Sox. Hall of Fame broadcaster Red Barber told the television audience, "I don't know what the paid attendance is today, but whatever it is, it is the smallest crowd in the history of Yankee Stadium, and this crowd is the story, not the game."
There were 413 paying fans.
Barber asked the cameras to pan the empty stands. The head of Yankees' media relations refused."
Now THAT would have been really funny to see!
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Children lose if health bill fails | ajc.com
Great op-ed piece that really explains the impact to the positive parts of the Affordable Care Act if the lawsuits against the individual mandate are upheld. Definitely worth reading.
Time to synergize
I blogged yesterday about Steven Pearlstein's column on the inability of the two parties to come together to offer constructive, synergistic solutions on a range of issues facing the country.
The Economist opines about how Kathy Hochul's victory in upstate New York will only just exacerbate the problem, comparing solutions to Medicare's finances to a used car dealer selling a lemon. Dana Milbank of The Washington Post goes further by explaining how Paul Ryan was a victim of his own scare tactics, which illustrates the problem but doesn't help solve it.
Lastly, Matt Miller writes a column about acknowledging that the entire RyanCare plan is not a disaster and it does have some good ideas to build around.
Getting back to the Economist piece, a very good point is made that represents a very sad reality:
"Both parties have, somewhere inside them, a serious proposal to reform Medicare. If they thought they could be elected by offering such a plan, they would do so."
What both parties miss in all of this is they've inadvertently synergized already. The "Premium Support" (aka Vouchers) in RyanCare were a Democratic idea. The individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act were a Republican idea. And the fact that each is being ripped apart after being embraced by the other side is the saddest part of all.
The Economist opines about how Kathy Hochul's victory in upstate New York will only just exacerbate the problem, comparing solutions to Medicare's finances to a used car dealer selling a lemon. Dana Milbank of The Washington Post goes further by explaining how Paul Ryan was a victim of his own scare tactics, which illustrates the problem but doesn't help solve it.
Lastly, Matt Miller writes a column about acknowledging that the entire RyanCare plan is not a disaster and it does have some good ideas to build around.
Getting back to the Economist piece, a very good point is made that represents a very sad reality:
"Both parties have, somewhere inside them, a serious proposal to reform Medicare. If they thought they could be elected by offering such a plan, they would do so."
What both parties miss in all of this is they've inadvertently synergized already. The "Premium Support" (aka Vouchers) in RyanCare were a Democratic idea. The individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act were a Republican idea. And the fact that each is being ripped apart after being embraced by the other side is the saddest part of all.
Mets shortstop Reyes on the Blue Jays’ radar?
This seems to be getting a lot of play up north. A part of me wonders if he isn't the missing piece for that organization. I always felt he was a better fit as the "final piece" rather than the "cornerstone" of an organization.
At least he'll be able to beat Yankees without wearing a Red Sox uniform. That can't be a bad thing. And I can't imagine how many triples he'll be able to hit in the gaps off that astroturf.
At least he'll be able to beat Yankees without wearing a Red Sox uniform. That can't be a bad thing. And I can't imagine how many triples he'll be able to hit in the gaps off that astroturf.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
The reasons education is the backbone of a society...
I've always believed that education is the backbone of a society. David Leonhardt writes a great column about what Amherst College is doing to ensure as much as possible that the backbone remains strong:
"The United States no longer leads the world in educational attainment, partly because so few low-income students — and surprisingly few middle-income students — graduate from four-year colleges. Getting more of these students into the best colleges would make a difference. Many higher-income students would still graduate from college, even if they went to a less elite one. A more educated population, in turn, would probably lift economic growth."
This is definitely a column worth reading.
"The United States no longer leads the world in educational attainment, partly because so few low-income students — and surprisingly few middle-income students — graduate from four-year colleges. Getting more of these students into the best colleges would make a difference. Many higher-income students would still graduate from college, even if they went to a less elite one. A more educated population, in turn, would probably lift economic growth."
This is definitely a column worth reading.
"The air of unreality that now permeates the political discussion is truly mind-boggling."
As many people know, I'm a huge fan of Steven Pearlstein's column in The Washington Post and today's was another superb one. In talking about the agenda President Obama must follow from a practical rather than ideological perspective, he offers one very astute observation of the politics of the last two years and where the biggest share of the blame really belongs:
"Fickle voters, of course, deserve a good part of the blame for this leadership vacuum. Whatever you think of President Obama’s agenda during the past two years, it was pretty much what he had promised. Two years on, his reward was a new Republican majority determined to reverse and delegitimize everything he had done. Now six months after that, the public has decided it doesn’t like the Republican program any better."
"Fickle voters, of course, deserve a good part of the blame for this leadership vacuum. Whatever you think of President Obama’s agenda during the past two years, it was pretty much what he had promised. Two years on, his reward was a new Republican majority determined to reverse and delegitimize everything he had done. Now six months after that, the public has decided it doesn’t like the Republican program any better."
"...even Crawford isn't worth Crawford money."
Interesting post that worries me as a Met fan because it'll drive up Jose Reyes' asking price. But it does explain the tangibles behind re-signing Reyes. The intangibles add up even further.
The best line from this post:
"Of course, there are two arguments against Reyes getting Crawford money in free agency: 1) he has trouble staying healthy; 2) even Crawford isn't worth Crawford money."
Ouch.
The best line from this post:
"Of course, there are two arguments against Reyes getting Crawford money in free agency: 1) he has trouble staying healthy; 2) even Crawford isn't worth Crawford money."
Ouch.
I'll huff and puff and I'll blow your house in
Yes, climate change is much worse than the big bad wolf...
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
The 'Joe Friday' explanation of tax policy
Joe Friday would be proud with The Economist's list of facts, which are often contradictory, about defining fair tax policy:
"When it comes to taxing high earners more, I am not sure what fairness has got to do with it. According to the Tax Foundation in 2008 the 5% of earners earned 34.7% of the nation's adjusted gross income, but paid approximately 58.7% percent of federal individual income taxes. Is that not their fair share?
Defenders of progressive taxation usually make a utilitarian argument. If you earn $250,000 parting with $20,000 is not as big a deal as it would be if you earned $25,000. In economics we’d say high earners receive a smaller benefit from an extra unit of consumption (assuming they spend more than poor people). So parting with some of your disposable income is less painful."
"Just the facts, ma'am."
"When it comes to taxing high earners more, I am not sure what fairness has got to do with it. According to the Tax Foundation in 2008 the 5% of earners earned 34.7% of the nation's adjusted gross income, but paid approximately 58.7% percent of federal individual income taxes. Is that not their fair share?
Defenders of progressive taxation usually make a utilitarian argument. If you earn $250,000 parting with $20,000 is not as big a deal as it would be if you earned $25,000. In economics we’d say high earners receive a smaller benefit from an extra unit of consumption (assuming they spend more than poor people). So parting with some of your disposable income is less painful."
"Just the facts, ma'am."
A view from inside the asylum...
New York magazine peels off a layer to reveal the paranoid schizophrenia that is Fox News:
"Going back to the 2008 campaign, [Obama advisor David]Axelrod had maintained an off-the-record dialogue with [Fox News chairman Roger] Ailes. He had faced off against Ailes in a U.S. Senate campaign in the early eighties and respected him as a fellow political warrior and shaper of narrative. But early on, Axelrod learned he couldn’t change Ailes’s outlook on Obama. In one meeting in 2008, Ailes told Axelrod that he was concerned that Obama wanted to create a national police force.
“You can’t be serious,” Axelrod replied. “What makes you think that?”
Ailes responded by e-mailing Axelrod a YouTube clip from a campaign speech Obama had given on national service, in which he called for the creation of a new civilian corps to work alongside the military on projects overseas.
Later, Axelrod related in a conversation that the exchange was the moment he realized Ailes truly believed what he was broadcasting."
It's a very, very long and enlightening read, as is the sidebar article to it.
"Going back to the 2008 campaign, [Obama advisor David]Axelrod had maintained an off-the-record dialogue with [Fox News chairman Roger] Ailes. He had faced off against Ailes in a U.S. Senate campaign in the early eighties and respected him as a fellow political warrior and shaper of narrative. But early on, Axelrod learned he couldn’t change Ailes’s outlook on Obama. In one meeting in 2008, Ailes told Axelrod that he was concerned that Obama wanted to create a national police force.
“You can’t be serious,” Axelrod replied. “What makes you think that?”
Ailes responded by e-mailing Axelrod a YouTube clip from a campaign speech Obama had given on national service, in which he called for the creation of a new civilian corps to work alongside the military on projects overseas.
Later, Axelrod related in a conversation that the exchange was the moment he realized Ailes truly believed what he was broadcasting."
It's a very, very long and enlightening read, as is the sidebar article to it.
Politics that works?
President Obama's favorite conservative talks about British politics today:
"If the quintessential American pol is standing in his sandbox screaming affirmations to http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifmembers of his own tribe, the quintessential British pol is standing across a table arguing face to face with his opponents.
British leaders and pundits know their counterparts better. They are less likely to get away with distortions and factual howlers. They are less likely to believe the other party is homogenously evil. They are more likely to learn from a wide range of people. When they do hate, their hatreds are more likely to be personal and less likely to take on the tenor of a holy war."
Hmm, maybe they're on to something over there. They certainly are entertaining. That's why Robin Williams once described them as "Congress with a two-drink minimum."
"If the quintessential American pol is standing in his sandbox screaming affirmations to http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifmembers of his own tribe, the quintessential British pol is standing across a table arguing face to face with his opponents.
British leaders and pundits know their counterparts better. They are less likely to get away with distortions and factual howlers. They are less likely to believe the other party is homogenously evil. They are more likely to learn from a wide range of people. When they do hate, their hatreds are more likely to be personal and less likely to take on the tenor of a holy war."
Hmm, maybe they're on to something over there. They certainly are entertaining. That's why Robin Williams once described them as "Congress with a two-drink minimum."
So he's not Kenyan or Indonesian. He's a "#1 Punjabi!" (Okay, so he's not that either.)
Wasn't Hillary really the "Democrat from Punjab"? Besides, the British Police can get creative with their code name for President Obama but he proved during his trip to India that he most definitely is not a '#1 Punjabi':
For further reference, this is how it's done:
For further reference, this is how it's done:
"Use your helmets to dig your own graves!"
Fred Wilpon seems to be channeling his own inner Peter Griffin by digging his own grave to Jeffrey Toobin in The New Yorker yesterday and by digging further in Sports Illustrated today:
"Phillips said other owners would have dismissed him before Wilpon did, describing Wilpon as fiercely loyal."
This is starting to sound like the end of the George W. Bush presidency, where his loyalty to people got him screwed over pretty bad. Let's hope Wilpon's tenure as the owner ends soon too.
"Phillips said other owners would have dismissed him before Wilpon did, describing Wilpon as fiercely loyal."
This is starting to sound like the end of the George W. Bush presidency, where his loyalty to people got him screwed over pretty bad. Let's hope Wilpon's tenure as the owner ends soon too.
Monday, May 23, 2011
UBS' McCann: We're not getting hitched to Wells Fargo - InvestmentNews
Oddly enough, this is the first time I heard a rumor about the sale of the UBS Wealth Management business that did not involve HSBC. All denials aside, where there's smoke, there's usually fire.
Immigration, Canadian-style
In a blog post on May 12th, I weighed in on a Slate article about our immigration policies and compared it to the Canadian model, which is more welcoming to highly-skilled immigrants and got some positive thoughts in a blog post on The Economist:
"...the United States really should be more open to high-skilled immigrants. They're good for the economy, and an uptick in demonstrably uncontroversial immigrants might mitigate anxiety about the group as a whole."
"...the United States really should be more open to high-skilled immigrants. They're good for the economy, and an uptick in demonstrably uncontroversial immigrants might mitigate anxiety about the group as a whole."
Friday, May 20, 2011
Social Security's "Mason-Dixon Line"
A great explanation of Paul Ryan's Social Security proposal:
"If there was ever going to be a generational war in this country, that high school class of ’74 would be its Mason-Dixon line. It’s the moment when Bill Clinton’s promise—“if you work hard and play by the rules you’ll get ahead”—began to lose its value."
"If there was ever going to be a generational war in this country, that high school class of ’74 would be its Mason-Dixon line. It’s the moment when Bill Clinton’s promise—“if you work hard and play by the rules you’ll get ahead”—began to lose its value."
Thursday, May 19, 2011
"Things That Make You Go Hmmm..."
I first said it in a blog post on March 7th about South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley being the 2012 GOP's version of the 2004 Barack Obama. Now a Politico article states something about her ambitions:
"One state party operative without any 2012 allegiances who is close to Haley ... noted that she’s “extremely ambitious” and “angling for something bigger.”"
Just one of those things that make you go hmmm...
"One state party operative without any 2012 allegiances who is close to Haley ... noted that she’s “extremely ambitious” and “angling for something bigger.”"
Just one of those things that make you go hmmm...
More on the religion and income thing...
I blogged earlier this week about David Leonhardt's posts about the apparent connection between income and religion. Leonhardt has yet another post on the God versus income debate. An interesting quote he takes from an article on The Chronicle of Higher Education:
"In their book, America’s Four Gods, Paul Froese and Christopher Bader write about the effect that people’s view of the divine has on their financial prospects. Americans, in the authors’ view, are divided into people who view God as an active or inactive presence and as either a benevolent or vengeful God. People who view God as both active and mean often have lower incomes. It’s a little hard to separate the cause and effect here. Do you believe God has it in for you because you have a low income or do you have a low income because you don’t believe you have much chance of doing well in this lifetime."
Looking at the chart, this point has validity to it, considering the more apocalyptic denominations appears towards the bottom left. However, the picture doesn't answer the cause and effect question.
"In their book, America’s Four Gods, Paul Froese and Christopher Bader write about the effect that people’s view of the divine has on their financial prospects. Americans, in the authors’ view, are divided into people who view God as an active or inactive presence and as either a benevolent or vengeful God. People who view God as both active and mean often have lower incomes. It’s a little hard to separate the cause and effect here. Do you believe God has it in for you because you have a low income or do you have a low income because you don’t believe you have much chance of doing well in this lifetime."
Looking at the chart, this point has validity to it, considering the more apocalyptic denominations appears towards the bottom left. However, the picture doesn't answer the cause and effect question.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
The Economic Impact of High Speed Rail: Transforming the Midwest
The Midwest High Speed Rail Association issued a report about how High Speed Rail can transform the Midwest:
"As the world’s fifth largest economy, (at $2.6 trillion and approximately equal to France, only the U.S., Chinese, Japanese and German economies are larger) the Midwest possesses a diverse manufacturing, agricultural and business services base anchored by nine major metropolitan areas. High speed rail (HSR) will have a transformative impact that will unify the Midwest and solidify its future position as one of the world’s most powerful economic mega-regions."
"As the world’s fifth largest economy, (at $2.6 trillion and approximately equal to France, only the U.S., Chinese, Japanese and German economies are larger) the Midwest possesses a diverse manufacturing, agricultural and business services base anchored by nine major metropolitan areas. High speed rail (HSR) will have a transformative impact that will unify the Midwest and solidify its future position as one of the world’s most powerful economic mega-regions."
What is the "Henry G. Freeman Jr. Pin Money Fund"?
If you saw the President's financial disclosure form, you may have noticed page 9, which reads:
"Mr. Henry G. Freeman Jr. died in 1917. His estate is administered by Wells Fargo Bank, San Francisco, CA as trustee. Mr. Freeman's will provided that upon the death of the last to die of certain named relatives, certain charitable income interests would be created and an annuity would be paid to each First Lady during her husband's term as President. In 2010, the First Lady received $10,000 from the Henry G. Freemen Jr. Pin Money Fund."
It turns out this is actually a very cool story that is worth reading.
"Mr. Henry G. Freeman Jr. died in 1917. His estate is administered by Wells Fargo Bank, San Francisco, CA as trustee. Mr. Freeman's will provided that upon the death of the last to die of certain named relatives, certain charitable income interests would be created and an annuity would be paid to each First Lady during her husband's term as President. In 2010, the First Lady received $10,000 from the Henry G. Freemen Jr. Pin Money Fund."
It turns out this is actually a very cool story that is worth reading.
Does your religion determine your income level?
New York Times columnist David Leonhardt has not one, not two, but three columns about whether or not there is a correlation between religion, education, and income level. All three columns are very interesting reads and worth taking a few minutes to read and digest.
It's as if their prayers haven't been answered?
Great article in The Washington Post about Americans' suspicion of atheists in spite of empirical evidence that shows they're not so bad and, in some ways, better than the 'average' American:
"A growing body of social science research reveals that atheists, and non-religious people in general, are far from the unsavory beings many assume them to be. On basic questions of morality and human decency — issues such as governmental use of torture, the death penalty, punitive hitting of children, racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, environmental degradation or human rights — the irreligious tend to be more ethical than their religious peers, particularly compared with those who describe themselves as very religious."
Interesting thing is Julia Gillard, the Prime Minister of Australia, admitted publicly to being an atheist and she is THE PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA! You would never see that happen in the United States. Then again, many people also claimed we would never see an African-American president in our lifetime either.
"A growing body of social science research reveals that atheists, and non-religious people in general, are far from the unsavory beings many assume them to be. On basic questions of morality and human decency — issues such as governmental use of torture, the death penalty, punitive hitting of children, racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, environmental degradation or human rights — the irreligious tend to be more ethical than their religious peers, particularly compared with those who describe themselves as very religious."
Interesting thing is Julia Gillard, the Prime Minister of Australia, admitted publicly to being an atheist and she is THE PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA! You would never see that happen in the United States. Then again, many people also claimed we would never see an African-American president in our lifetime either.
Two funny baseball videos...
A couple of great baseball videos. First, Evan Longoria snags a line drive in the middle of an interview.
Next, a fan runs out onto the field, climbs up a couple of fences and rafters and actually evades security trying to catch him.
Next, a fan runs out onto the field, climbs up a couple of fences and rafters and actually evades security trying to catch him.
"Back(story) in Black"
Finally! An explanation to where those black New York Mets uniforms originated. This is worth reading because it's a really good story.
Piling on...
I blogged last week about a number of columnists pushing Pakistan to act on terrorism. Washington Post columnist David Ignatius piles on to the Paki-bashing.
Michael Vick should follow the Mark Sanchez model?
Philadelphia Inquirer sports columnist Ashley Fox gives the following piece of advice to Eagles QB Michael Vick:
"Well, there is a way to organize a workout, and then there is Mark Sanchez's way, and Vick would be wise to follow Sanchez's blueprint. It is, after all, the gold standard, and as we all know the Eagles are the NFL's gold standard, so nothing less should do."
As a Jets fan, I have yet to consider anything Mark Sanchez does to be the 'gold standard'. I'd say he's working his way there but thought he's probably still a 'bronze standard' or, at best, 'silver standard' right about now. Then I read Fox's description of the voluntary workout Sanchez organized for his teammates:
"Sanchez recently held a five-day passing camp with 14 of his New York Jets teammates in Southern California, where the quarterback lives in the offseason. Sanchez rented plush villas on the Pacific Ocean to house the players. He catered lunch every day from a local restaurant - including fish tacos - and had a truck on site from the famed West Coast hamburger joint In-N-Out Burger.
Every day, there was an optional morning workout with Sanchez's personal trainer, followed by a film session when the QB reviewed cut-ups from last season, and then an hourlong practice. Sanchez made up playbooks, provided Gatorade, had ice baths set up on site, and even had a postpractice "skills" competition that included a water-balloon toss. He gave away prizes, including a 65-inch 3D television, Meister watches and iPads. Everyone in attendance received sandals and gear.
Sanchez recruited sponsors and trainers. One night, he took the guys to see a Lakers playoff game. The camp even had a catchy name: Jets West.
Not surprisingly, most of the Jets' key offensive players attended, even free agent-to-be wide receiver Braylon Edwards, 40-year-old quarterback Mark Brunell, and veteran running back LaDainian Tomlinson."
This coupled with the comments from Rex Ryan's book makes me very optimistic about Sanchez as a leader. Now, if only the lockout can end...
"Well, there is a way to organize a workout, and then there is Mark Sanchez's way, and Vick would be wise to follow Sanchez's blueprint. It is, after all, the gold standard, and as we all know the Eagles are the NFL's gold standard, so nothing less should do."
As a Jets fan, I have yet to consider anything Mark Sanchez does to be the 'gold standard'. I'd say he's working his way there but thought he's probably still a 'bronze standard' or, at best, 'silver standard' right about now. Then I read Fox's description of the voluntary workout Sanchez organized for his teammates:
"Sanchez recently held a five-day passing camp with 14 of his New York Jets teammates in Southern California, where the quarterback lives in the offseason. Sanchez rented plush villas on the Pacific Ocean to house the players. He catered lunch every day from a local restaurant - including fish tacos - and had a truck on site from the famed West Coast hamburger joint In-N-Out Burger.
Every day, there was an optional morning workout with Sanchez's personal trainer, followed by a film session when the QB reviewed cut-ups from last season, and then an hourlong practice. Sanchez made up playbooks, provided Gatorade, had ice baths set up on site, and even had a postpractice "skills" competition that included a water-balloon toss. He gave away prizes, including a 65-inch 3D television, Meister watches and iPads. Everyone in attendance received sandals and gear.
Sanchez recruited sponsors and trainers. One night, he took the guys to see a Lakers playoff game. The camp even had a catchy name: Jets West.
Not surprisingly, most of the Jets' key offensive players attended, even free agent-to-be wide receiver Braylon Edwards, 40-year-old quarterback Mark Brunell, and veteran running back LaDainian Tomlinson."
This coupled with the comments from Rex Ryan's book makes me very optimistic about Sanchez as a leader. Now, if only the lockout can end...
Friday, May 13, 2011
Making the drain go up...
The Economist weighs in on the same topic I blogged about yesterday:
"At a time when America is concerned about excess housing supply and anxious to boost its innovative capacity it is madness that so many willing immigrants, including high-skilled workers, including those educated in America, find it difficult to impossible to gain permission to work in the country on a stable, long-term basis."
"At a time when America is concerned about excess housing supply and anxious to boost its innovative capacity it is madness that so many willing immigrants, including high-skilled workers, including those educated in America, find it difficult to impossible to gain permission to work in the country on a stable, long-term basis."
Colorado Farmer Tom Cruise...
This article, in a nutshell, explains where the argument on taxes really stands:
"Unsurprisingly, many very influential people jumped at the chance to exploit this obvious flaw in the state’s tax code. In addition to Tom Cruise, the Denver Post reported that Kurt Russell, Goldie Hawn, a state senator, the state’s treasurer, an energy industry billionaire, a media mogul, and the chairman of Discovery Communications all benefited from this loophole. Countless other well-off of landowners in Colorado undoubtedly benefited as well."
I'm guessing these individuals could exploit this loophole because they had lawyers that could find these loopholes and had land that they owned themselves.
This is why the tax debate is between two sides arguing about things that are generally irrelevant. The greater issue isn't rates or deductions. Show me someone on food stamps that knows how to find these kinds of loopholes?
That's where the libertarian free market has left people. If you have money, you can afford to hire a team of people to do the dirty leg work for you. If you have no money, you need to do the dirty leg work on your own in your spare time between earning a living to support your family, often times with multiple jobs and/or 60-hour work weeks, and paying the bills to keep the roof over the family's head and the food on the dinner table.
In a way, these people at the top are job creators. The problem is they only create jobs for lawyers that can get them out of paying taxes. The so-called job creation pretty much ends right there. This is something people on the Left and the Right should be ashamed of.
"Unsurprisingly, many very influential people jumped at the chance to exploit this obvious flaw in the state’s tax code. In addition to Tom Cruise, the Denver Post reported that Kurt Russell, Goldie Hawn, a state senator, the state’s treasurer, an energy industry billionaire, a media mogul, and the chairman of Discovery Communications all benefited from this loophole. Countless other well-off of landowners in Colorado undoubtedly benefited as well."
I'm guessing these individuals could exploit this loophole because they had lawyers that could find these loopholes and had land that they owned themselves.
This is why the tax debate is between two sides arguing about things that are generally irrelevant. The greater issue isn't rates or deductions. Show me someone on food stamps that knows how to find these kinds of loopholes?
That's where the libertarian free market has left people. If you have money, you can afford to hire a team of people to do the dirty leg work for you. If you have no money, you need to do the dirty leg work on your own in your spare time between earning a living to support your family, often times with multiple jobs and/or 60-hour work weeks, and paying the bills to keep the roof over the family's head and the food on the dinner table.
In a way, these people at the top are job creators. The problem is they only create jobs for lawyers that can get them out of paying taxes. The so-called job creation pretty much ends right there. This is something people on the Left and the Right should be ashamed of.
Fangraphs.com: Carlos Beltran's Trade Value
A realistic look at what Carlos Beltran can get in return for the Mets.
Thursday, May 12, 2011
What if we were the bottom of the (brain) drain?
Great article in Slate Magazine about how flawed our immigration policy is against the most qualified applicants:
"The country does not cap the number of "family-based" green cards, available to relatives of U.S. residents. But it does cap the number of "employment-based" green cards—the ones often needed by entrepreneurial super-immigrants—at 140,000 per year."
I've seen this flaw many times over as I've seen numerous immigrant families in which the one successful sibling emigrated to the United States and subsequently sponsored the not-so-successful/educated siblings to come over without any issues getting them here but plenty of adjustment issues once they got here.
The Slate article gets to the heart of what New York Times columnist Tom Friedman always asks about why foreign students upon receiving a Ph.D. from an American university aren't given a green card along with their degree. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing something similar to the Canadian system, which has a separate and distinct category for working professionals wanting to emigrate to Canada.
"The country does not cap the number of "family-based" green cards, available to relatives of U.S. residents. But it does cap the number of "employment-based" green cards—the ones often needed by entrepreneurial super-immigrants—at 140,000 per year."
I've seen this flaw many times over as I've seen numerous immigrant families in which the one successful sibling emigrated to the United States and subsequently sponsored the not-so-successful/educated siblings to come over without any issues getting them here but plenty of adjustment issues once they got here.
The Slate article gets to the heart of what New York Times columnist Tom Friedman always asks about why foreign students upon receiving a Ph.D. from an American university aren't given a green card along with their degree. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing something similar to the Canadian system, which has a separate and distinct category for working professionals wanting to emigrate to Canada.
Why does the GOP hate taxes so much? - Ezra Klein, Washington Post
Ezra Klein asks some conservative economists a question I've been asking for years without getting an answer to it.
Now if someone could explain why they hate non-Christians as much as they hate taxes, all my questions about the Right will be answered.
Now if someone could explain why they hate non-Christians as much as they hate taxes, all my questions about the Right will be answered.
Pushing Pakistan to act
A couple of stinging columns from Fareed Zakaria (an Indian-born Muslim-American) and Zalmay Khalilzad (an Afghan-born Muslim-American).
Zakaria quotes someone telling him:
""It's like a person, caught in bed with another man's wife, who is indignant that someone entered his house," one Pakistani scholar, who preferred not to be named for fear of repercussions, told me."
whereas Khalilzad writes:
"The killing of Bin Laden only 60 miles from Islamabad, its capital, has put Pakistan on the defensive, and the nature of our strike capability is not lost on Pakistani leaders and their terrorist and insurgent clients."
Perhaps Pakistan should be worried about the Muslims from its neighboring countries that are growing more and more skeptical of it than what the United States wants to do with it?
Zakaria quotes someone telling him:
""It's like a person, caught in bed with another man's wife, who is indignant that someone entered his house," one Pakistani scholar, who preferred not to be named for fear of repercussions, told me."
whereas Khalilzad writes:
"The killing of Bin Laden only 60 miles from Islamabad, its capital, has put Pakistan on the defensive, and the nature of our strike capability is not lost on Pakistani leaders and their terrorist and insurgent clients."
Perhaps Pakistan should be worried about the Muslims from its neighboring countries that are growing more and more skeptical of it than what the United States wants to do with it?
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Incredibly bold or incredibly stupid...
So let me get this straight: Making false claims like "pulling the plug on grandma" are good. Making valid claims like "turning Medicare into a voucher program" are bad. Can someone please explain to me where this kind of logic comes from?
Obi-Wan Kenobi Is Dead, Vader Says - Galactic Empire Times
Obi-Wan Kenobi Is Dead, Vader Says - Galactic Empire Times
This is great! I love how they got the layout and font to look EXACTLY like The New York Times.
This is great! I love how they got the layout and font to look EXACTLY like The New York Times.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Vermont passes single-payer healthcare bill...
Vermont takes the first step to go above and beyond what is called for in the Affordable Care Act.
In the meantime, New Jersey is gathering information about how to set up the exchange. You can also put your two cents in and complete the Rutgers CSHP survey yourself.
In the meantime, New Jersey is gathering information about how to set up the exchange. You can also put your two cents in and complete the Rutgers CSHP survey yourself.
Friday, May 6, 2011
How many members should be in the House of Representatives?
Ezra Klein had a great post this week about how the number of House members, 435, hasn't increased since 1911! As a result, we have one representative per 709,760 people in the country, the largest it has ever been and larger than all other representative democracies.
This got me thinking, how many members of the House should there be? To alleviate the issue, and make it truly representative, I have a fairly easy solution. Tie it to reapportionment and the census and take the US population divided it by the population of the smallest state. The last census results counted the American population as 308,745,538 people, with Wyoming as the smallest state with a population of 563,626. So, (308,754,538/563,626) = 548 members of the House. It would break down this way:
Alabama - 9
Alaska - 1
Arizona - 11
Arkansas - 5
California - 66
Colorado - 9
Connecticut - 6
Delaware - 2
District of Columbia - 1
Florida - 33
Georgia - 17
Hawaii - 2
Idaho - 3
Illinois - 23
Indiana - 12
Iowa - 5
Kansas - 5
Kentucky - 8
Louisiana - 8
Maine - 2
Maryland - 10
Massachusetts - 12
Michigan - 18
Minnesota - 9
Mississippi - 5
Missouri - 11
Montana - 2
Nebraska - 3
Nevada - 5
New Hampshire - 2
New Jersey - 16
New Mexico - 4
New York - 34
North Carolina - 17
North Dakota - 1
Ohio - 21
Oklahoma - 7
Oregon - 7
Pennsylvania - 23
Rhode Island - 2
South Carolina - 8
South Dakota - 1
Tennessee - 11
Texas - 45
Utah - 5
Vermont - 1
Virginia - 14
Washington - 12
West Virginia - 3
Wisconsin - 10
Wyoming - 1
It breaks down fairly equitably, even giving the District of Columbia one representative of its own. Of course, as I've said before, this makes too much sense, so someone will prevent this from happening.
Also, I haven't done the Red State/Blue State/Purple State breakdown yet. I'd be curious to see how that would change from today.
This got me thinking, how many members of the House should there be? To alleviate the issue, and make it truly representative, I have a fairly easy solution. Tie it to reapportionment and the census and take the US population divided it by the population of the smallest state. The last census results counted the American population as 308,745,538 people, with Wyoming as the smallest state with a population of 563,626. So, (308,754,538/563,626) = 548 members of the House. It would break down this way:
Alabama - 9
Alaska - 1
Arizona - 11
Arkansas - 5
California - 66
Colorado - 9
Connecticut - 6
Delaware - 2
District of Columbia - 1
Florida - 33
Georgia - 17
Hawaii - 2
Idaho - 3
Illinois - 23
Indiana - 12
Iowa - 5
Kansas - 5
Kentucky - 8
Louisiana - 8
Maine - 2
Maryland - 10
Massachusetts - 12
Michigan - 18
Minnesota - 9
Mississippi - 5
Missouri - 11
Montana - 2
Nebraska - 3
Nevada - 5
New Hampshire - 2
New Jersey - 16
New Mexico - 4
New York - 34
North Carolina - 17
North Dakota - 1
Ohio - 21
Oklahoma - 7
Oregon - 7
Pennsylvania - 23
Rhode Island - 2
South Carolina - 8
South Dakota - 1
Tennessee - 11
Texas - 45
Utah - 5
Vermont - 1
Virginia - 14
Washington - 12
West Virginia - 3
Wisconsin - 10
Wyoming - 1
It breaks down fairly equitably, even giving the District of Columbia one representative of its own. Of course, as I've said before, this makes too much sense, so someone will prevent this from happening.
Also, I haven't done the Red State/Blue State/Purple State breakdown yet. I'd be curious to see how that would change from today.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Credit where credit is due: Navy SEALs, then everyone else involved...
I recently commented on an online post:
"Can't give more or less credit to anyone other than the Navy SEALs that pulled this off. What this proves is the vibrancy of our democracy in spite of the polarization of the recent years. The reason this happened is because the Clinton people told the Bush people that bin Laden is known to use couriers, which the Bush people used to identify the couriers and their names, which the Obama people used to find out where the courier lived. Even in the stablest of democracies, it would be rare for leaders of opposing political parties sharing that kind of information."
to which a friend of mine wrote:
"excellent point. seriously, more people need to read what you wrote. been reading too much of Bush vs Obama BS regarding this Osama killing."
So here you go. :-)
"Can't give more or less credit to anyone other than the Navy SEALs that pulled this off. What this proves is the vibrancy of our democracy in spite of the polarization of the recent years. The reason this happened is because the Clinton people told the Bush people that bin Laden is known to use couriers, which the Bush people used to identify the couriers and their names, which the Obama people used to find out where the courier lived. Even in the stablest of democracies, it would be rare for leaders of opposing political parties sharing that kind of information."
to which a friend of mine wrote:
"excellent point. seriously, more people need to read what you wrote. been reading too much of Bush vs Obama BS regarding this Osama killing."
So here you go. :-)
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Would we be asking about the birth certificate if his name was Barry Dunham?
I agree with the premise of this column to some extent.
"This shameful episode has little to do with reality and everything to do with the strangeness of Obama’s background — especially his race. Many Republicans refuse to accept that Obama could come from such an exotic stew and still be “American.” They have to delegitimize him. So, even though the certificate of live birth first made public in 2008 is a legal document that any court would have to recognize, they demanded more.
No American president has ever been so humiliated, and those who think it has nothing to do with race are deluding themselves."
Odd sounding names aren't really questioned with someone like Reince Priebus but even that may have more to do with the combination of his political affiliation and race than just his race or name alone. If former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm ran for president, only a few would initially question it even though she was born in Canada (Vancouver, British Columbia specifically).
The same column even made a similar statement about our 35th President:
“At least one president, John F. Kennedy, came from bootlegging Irish heritage. It was always a side issue, the mist of his father’s past, though nobody ever forced Jack Kennedy to prove he wasn’t a criminal. He looked like most Americans, and that was enough.”
Perhaps the same could be said for a ‘Barry Dunham’? I get asked repeatedly how old I was when I came to this country, only to surprise people with the fact that I was born in Brooklyn, New York and my parents gave a traditional name because they were proud of their heritage.
If Barack Obama was known as Barry Dunham, a guy from Hawai'i that used his mother's maiden name and childhood nickname because he barely knew his own father, would we be having the same birther discussion?
If I ran for President of the United States one day, would I get asked this question repeatedly? I'm not so sure I wouldn't. Of course, I'm not planning to run for President anytime soon but if I do one day, I did get a copy of my birth certificate.
"This shameful episode has little to do with reality and everything to do with the strangeness of Obama’s background — especially his race. Many Republicans refuse to accept that Obama could come from such an exotic stew and still be “American.” They have to delegitimize him. So, even though the certificate of live birth first made public in 2008 is a legal document that any court would have to recognize, they demanded more.
No American president has ever been so humiliated, and those who think it has nothing to do with race are deluding themselves."
Odd sounding names aren't really questioned with someone like Reince Priebus but even that may have more to do with the combination of his political affiliation and race than just his race or name alone. If former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm ran for president, only a few would initially question it even though she was born in Canada (Vancouver, British Columbia specifically).
The same column even made a similar statement about our 35th President:
“At least one president, John F. Kennedy, came from bootlegging Irish heritage. It was always a side issue, the mist of his father’s past, though nobody ever forced Jack Kennedy to prove he wasn’t a criminal. He looked like most Americans, and that was enough.”
Perhaps the same could be said for a ‘Barry Dunham’? I get asked repeatedly how old I was when I came to this country, only to surprise people with the fact that I was born in Brooklyn, New York and my parents gave a traditional name because they were proud of their heritage.
If Barack Obama was known as Barry Dunham, a guy from Hawai'i that used his mother's maiden name and childhood nickname because he barely knew his own father, would we be having the same birther discussion?
If I ran for President of the United States one day, would I get asked this question repeatedly? I'm not so sure I wouldn't. Of course, I'm not planning to run for President anytime soon but if I do one day, I did get a copy of my birth certificate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)