The Joys (sic) of Manual Labor

 Ever since I left the farm, my experience of manual labor has been mostly at my discretion.  That's key.  Even when it isn't, as when we get a big snowstorm and I have to shovel out it's not too bad.  I can tell myself I'm fighting the elements, along with some (not many, the softies) of my neighbors.

Gardening is a hobby with a reward of vegetables, so the work involved is just a prerequisite to a payoff.

There have been times when I really got into using my hands.  The family farm was populated with my father's constructions and improvements: hen houses, brooder houses, range shelters, milk house, cow shed, equipment shed, 3 stall garage, etc. My attempts were more domestic, dining room table and chairs, light box, book shelves, etc.  That was all after I bought my house and before marriage.

This last week or so has brought me back to manual work, not building anything, but repairs around the house. It's been a change from my usual winter routine of reading and TV, but enough to remind me of the satisfaction that can come when you fix something, not as well or nearly as quickly as the expert who does the work for her living, but "good enough fo,r government work", as we used to say.

A Test for "Vertical Farming"

 Starting to see articles on problems that "vertical farming" enterprises are encountering.  Basically it's energy costs, which have gone up recently. Unfortunately energy costs can be quite variable, as anyone who lived through the 1970's can attest. I'd also expect a lot of variation as society digests the conversion to renewable energy sources.

(I was dubious of vertical farming from back when it just was pie in the sky, relying on the sun for energy.  In the very long range, if we get to cheap fusion energy, vertical farming may indeed become economically feasible. But that's a long way away.)

What Robots Learn From Us

Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution wrote something, a mere sentence, which impressed me, impressed me so much I misremembered it as "what will robots learn from us?"  (Cowen wrote "A.I.s" but "robots" is the term I like, which I think can include all forms of artificial intelligence.)

It's a good question--mostly robots and other forms of artificial intelligence learn what humans have already learned, at least the humans living in the world of robots, etc.That means, by definition, that they will be biased. 

I wrote "mostly" because for example robots which learn to walk, learn what it means in terms of their motors, gears, and levers--their bodies--not what it means for humans to walk  So robots do experience the world somewhat differently than humans. Possibly robots won't learn some things from us; it's hard to say.

Merry Christmas

 Hope you get more than you deserve, as the theology of this day goes. 

Professor Evaluations

 I follow a fair number of professors on Twitter, mostly historians. I occasionally see tweets complaining about the student evaluations they receive. 

I don't have any sense at all of how student evaluations compare with other evaluation setups, like reviews of products on the Internet, or reviews on Yelp. You'd think it's likely that the evaluations would be somewhat similar--that is, my perception of product and service reviews is that they tend to be more favorable than my intuition is.  Certainly when I evaluate I tend to lend to the positive so I assume that's true of others.

Sometimes the evaluation reported in the tweet is critical, and often the reaction is dismissive.  I suppose that makes sense--if you get some criticism which is useful, it's not going to irritate you enough to tweet about.  But the dismissive bit strikes me as reflecting insecurity and aggravates me enough to blog about evaluations.

Anyhow, I remember an evaluation I got once from my presentation on some program; don't remember which one.  It was mixed, to the effect Bill knows his stuff, but he drones in a monotone. 

😀

It was, and is, true.  It was useful.  IIRC this was near the end of my career in making presentations, and likely accelerated it.  It was much easier to sit in the rear of the meeting room whild one of my employees made her presentation and pat myself on the back for putting her forward. 

Tesla Self-Driving Good Enough for Me

 I struggled to find the NYTimes article I want to comment from.  Turns out it 's over a month old, on-line, but just published in the print version today. It's a ride-along with the owner of a Tesla self-driving car, something of a beta test as they try to improve their software to be safe for wide release.  The owner has a specific location which apparently gives the current software fits, a left turn with 3 lanes of on-coming traffic into a specific lane of another 3-lane road.

My reaction to the description: it's good enough for me to buy.  I've leased my last two cars, on the mistaken assumption that I might not be driving in the future (the future keeps receding, but it's coming). Anyhow, that means I know I've driven about 5500 miles in 2 years.  Granted that part of the figure is the result of reduced activity from the pandemic, but as I age I drive less.

More importantly, the proportion of my driving which occurs on routes I've used before keeps increasing.  I don't know what it is, but likely 95 percent or more.  That means if I buy a self-driving car it can quickly become familiar with my routes, and familiarity means the software can handle more and more situations.  Also, as an older driver I'm more cautious than the average bear (much to the aggravation of some of my fellow drivers), so I'm both more likely to pay attention to the car's operation and less likely to be frustrated as the car responds to new situations by slowing and/or stopping--something which I've seen reported as a problem. 

So the bottom line, there's a niche out there to sell self-driving cars; it just needs to be identified.  Once such cars get into the niche, the process of expanding their capabilities to expand the niche can proceed much faster.

Tax Returns Public?

 I feel conflicted about the possible release of Trump's tax returns.  It's a slippery slope; release his and pretty soon you're releasing returns of all candidates, even for dog catcher.  The system BT (before Trump) was pretty good; candidates released tax information but they could fudge a bit around the edges. As long as they paid obeisance to the idea of public knowledge, they could get away with the fudges. (No, I don't have cases to cite, but just a vague memory of some candidates in primaries doing so.)

On the other hand, my great grandfather's taxable income was released back in Civil War days and published in the local paper, along with everyone else's. Why should we be different.

[Had an interruption to blogging because of house problems.]

Fifth Act--Relying on Connections

I blogged earlier about  Eliot Ackerman's Fifth Act,  Thinking about it some more--one thing stands out is the reliance on personal connections. In the chaos of our exit from Afghanistan, personal connections were everywhere.  Initially it was the personal connection of American soldiers, diplomats, and contractors with those who had worked with them.  The Afghani asked their friends to help. As the days passed and the panic spread, Afghanis who had no such history contacted Afghanis who had the connection: a friend of a friend, a cousin, a neighbor.

Once contacted the Americans, like Ackerman, relied on their own connections. An ex-soldier contacted an old comrade still in Afghanistan.  As the days passed, the calls for help spread, asking any acquaintance who might have any pull over the Marines at the Kabul airport for help.  Sometimes the calls go to the chain of command but those at the gates have more power; the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is eventually at the mercy of and relying upon the grunt, the lieutenant at the gate.

In the situation, the bureaucratic rules get bent and broken, which I imagine is common in extreme cases.

I also see the whole process is dependent on the internet--the appeals for help may be phoned, but the logistics needed to coordinate the arrival of a group at the appropriate airport gate at the time when the right American is there; they all rely on forms of internet communication: email, Twitter, Slack, 

I assume our exit from Saigon back in the day was somewhat similar, but without the internet the connections were much more limited.

The Doomed Quest for Clarity in Government

 The Senate has passed a bill to: "expand and update an existing law on plain language requirements for agencies" which is to apply to all writing which the public might read, i.e., contracts, applications, etc. etc.

Why do I say it's doomed?  We've had almost 55 years worth of campaigning on the subject with no claims of victory.

I remember Jimmy Carter, who had a drive for "Plain English". See this website.  At that time we had to include in the clearance package for regulations a certification that the regulation had been reviewed for plain English. It turned into a rubber stamp exercise.  That's the way it goes in the bureaucracy.  The bureaucrat is most concerned that the document be acceptable to those who clear it, to her bosses whether in the chain of command or with veto power (often the lawyers). Those people are years removed from a personal concern with the clarity of government forms. 

Looking Ahead to 2024

 Sen Sinema's switch to being an independent is viewed as a way to avoid a Democratic primary which she would likely lose.  So if she runs as an independent in 2024 it may be a 3-way contest, possibly splitting the Democratic and independent vote and permitting the Republican to win.  There's lots of possibilities--if it appears Sinema will run, does that mean the Democratic and Republican primaries will be more favorable to the more radical candidates?  

I've also seen discussion over the adverse Senate map for 2024--Tester, Manchin, Brown, Rosen, and AZ are all chancy or adverse.   A Democratic who has rose-colored glasses might predict that by Nov. 2024 the economy will have picked up, having dodged a recession next year, and we can compare the country to 1984.  And Biden will have become popular, and the Republicans will have been flailing in Congress to do anything.  And if the Republican presidential candidate is Trump, or someone equally as unpopular and incompetent (hard to imagine, but don't underestimate Republicans), we could be looking at a landslide.

I estimate the probability of that outcome as <1 percent. 

Why I Envy the Young

 I clicked on this discussion and demonstration of the physics of a ball on a turntable. Though my capacity to absorb the new is limited these days, it's still interesting, just a phenomon--forget the equations.

It's an example of why I envy the young.  There's so much material online to learn from these days.  In the '40's and '50's there were books.  Popular Mechanics might have been the magazine closest to some of the Youtube videos, but still miles and miles away. But with the visual examples and the ability to drill down into subjects, today's world is an autodidact's dream.

There might be tradeoffs--amid all the possibilities and attractions could an autodidact focus enough to contribute to knowledge, but still.. 

Churches--Merging and Splitting, and Also Tech

 I've mentioned some of my paternal ancestors were Presbyterians, so I've a little knowledge of how that denomination has split and merged over the centuries. 

In my youth there was movement towards the unification of many Christian denominations; it was being pushed by the National Council of Churches.  It was generally liberal, based on Social Gospel, internationalism (World Council of Churches), etc.  

Beginning in the 1970s or before it seems the tide has changed; instead of churches flowing together from tributaries into one big body of common belief, the water is rising and flowing back into the various tributaries.  

The recent split of the Methodists  is just the latest instance of secession movements. 

There seems to be a broader phenomenon of institutions growing larger, then splitting.  Back  around 1970 we had a lot of "conglomerates"--companies buying up other companies into one big outfit.  Even GE under Jack Welch was adding different lines of business. But there too the tide has turned, and selling off branches now seems the trend, at least in older parts of the economy.  The new tech outfits like Amazon and Google have expanded.  When and whether the acquisition process will reverse remains to be seen.

Complexity of Modern Life

 Had to go to my bank branch today and talk to a real person, who was very helpful BTW.  It was the first time in years.  I had told a bank rep on the phone earlier that I was confident I could follow the instructions in their online tutorial and manage the matter online.  

I was wrong.  Whether it's bad memory or fact, I got very confused, partly because of what I perceived as changes in the way the website operated, partly because the software I was running didn't work according to my expectations.  I thought, if you can fill out some fields in a form on line, you ought to be able to fill out all of them online.  As it turned out, filling out the remaining fields with ink was fine.  

I think part of what's happening these days is the addition problem--we add new programs or new features to old programs and we change the organizations.   But the new or changed is not tested to be consistent and compatible with the old.  The builders of the new have a different take, a different approach,, to their construction, so users/clients/customers find their expectations are faulty.  

My wife and I experienced that today, but when I read posts on the FSA employee group on Facebook I see county office employees (and presumably their farmers) having similar problems with what Congress and the administration do. 

My Inner Puritan

 Why did we need to double the size of our houses in the last 50 years?

Why did we need to increase the proportion of SUV's and pickups we buy to 80 percent of new vehicles?

Why does the average American family spend $1700 on clothing in a year?

Road Rage, Then and Now

My cousin remembers the experience in the 1930s of riding with her father driving.  He was a reckless driver; she says he had "road rage" before the name.

For those who don't remember the days before the interstate, and who no longer regularly drive in rural areas, two-lane roads were standard.  In hilly areas, such as upstate New York, that meant a lot of blind curves, and no-passing zones.  On long drives, like that from Maryland to Minneapolis, or even North Fenton to Ithaca, those zones were frustrating to those of us who are impatient.  Find yourself behind a car whose driver was old, or cautious, or law-abiding (those were more common in those days than now), on a road with lots of traffic coming towards you, with a number of curves or hills, you'd get more and more frustrated, each time you swerved over the middle line and saw a car coming, or ran out of the dashed passing line and into the double white line.

Eventually either the slowboat in front of you would turn off, or you'd take the chance of passing when you really shouldn't.

Afghanistan and US

 Just finished Elliot Ackerman's "Act Five, America's End in Afghanistan". I liked it very much. While the title might imply it's all about the exit from Afghanistan, it's not, not entirely. The construction is different: the thread which drives the narrative is a series of attempts at coordinating through calls with friends and strangers the permissions and logistics of getting Afghans who worked for America and their families onto the planes after the fall of Kabul.  The desperation of the efforts contrasts with his description of the vacation trip with wife and children. 

Another thread is composed of episodes from his tours in Afghanistan (serving first as a Marine officer with the 1-8 (regiment), then as an officer working with paramilitaries (Afghan troop and US special forces), and finally as a CIA paralmilitary officer doing the same. A third thread covers episodes from his life outside of Afghanistan. These threads provide context for his calls.  He weaves his threads together into a nice tapestry, colored with thoughts on America's two wars (he served five tours in Iraq and Afghanistan).

He's critical of all the administrations--Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden for their decision, but most of all critical of Americans for the growing separation between society and the military, and the growing inolvement of the military in partisan politics.  It was published in this summer, when we still feared the outcome of the 2022 elections, which went better, more quietly, than we thought then.  

Loss of Authority

 Was thinking about the question of authority--who has it, what does it mean, etc.

Seems to me "authority" has drained away from the people and organizations which had it in my youth. It's perhaps particularly so in the family--as the patriarchy has decline, so has the authority of the father (maybe it's the same thing).

Surveys of the public on their respect for various institutions, police, schools, churches, etc. show a decline over the past decades.  As further confirmation, here's an ngram of American sources (the graph is a smoother decline if you leave the setting at "English").

The Return of Covid

 This NYTimes piece says it may be returning. People mostly aren't masking--the Post mentioned very few masked at last night's state dinner. And they aren't boosting.

(I got my fifth shot, the co-valent booster) the other day.  I sometimes mask, sometimes don't.)  We seem to be accepting of  roughly 300 deaths a day, or maybe 100,000 a year. What does the future hold 

The Visual Revolution

 Discussing our childhoods with a cousin, we both had the experience of Life magazine. For me it was a new perspective on the world.  Before another cousin passed on a few old copies of Life in the late 40's, I hadn't seen many pictures.  Newspapers at that time didn't print many photographs, certainly nothing in color. What pictures I did see were mostly advertising illustrations. 

There were, of course, the newsreels at the movies, but we didn't go to them very often, usually just to Disney movies maybe four or five times a year.

The same cousin who provided the issues of Life also passed on a few National Geographics.  Both magazines were a revelation, in their different ways.  For one, my definition of decolletage is linked to Sophia Loren. 

Since the 1950's we've become a much more visual culture, between the internet, cellphones, and streaming video. I don't know what the change means for other aspects of society, though likely today's childen will never have the same feelings as I did in viewing Ms. Loren (whose wikipedia entry images doesn't include any low necklines.)

Different Browsers, Different Strokes

I use Chrome as my default browser. There seems to be some setting(s) which inhibit accessing certain urls/sites. In some cases when I click on a url the page will start to load a bit, showing maybe a geometric figure, but no content loads.  In other cases there's no activity. 

Possibly connected, sometimes I get a message about the site not being secure--i.e., not using https.  Some of the time I can understand; it's an small website, likely not regularly updated, but some of the time it's idiosyncratic, a site which I can access some of the time, or almost all the time.

Today I tried to access a wikipedia website, which froze.  So I switched to Firefox and had no problem.  

When I look at the settings in Chrome, I don't see anything which is likely the cause. 

The Rise of Individualism

Is there a relationship between the decline of amateurism, most recently seen in the NCAA's new rules on name, image, likeness (NIL) and the desire to work remotely?

I think there is.  Both were subjects in today's newspapers. Today's not a good blogging day, may expand my thoughts later.

The Enduring Greatness of Jim Brown

 When my family first got a TV, the NY Giants games were the ones mostly on TV, so I became a Giant fan. I remember the games with the Cleveland Browns and the greatest NFL back, Jim Brown (who once scored 6 touchdowns against my alma mater, setting a record that lasted for 40+ years, and he didn't just score TD's, he kicked the extra points as well).

When I got to college, I worked in a dorm kitchen along with a man from Long Island.  At that time lacrosse was very much a niche sport; I think it was popular on Long Island and upstate NY where Native Americans continued to play. As good as Jim Brown was at football, he was better at lacrosse, as John told me at the time and was ratified by the lacrosse people.  

Changing of the Guard

 We're seeing a turnover of House leadership for the Democrats. That's good; we need younger members and younger leaders. Sen. Schumer seems to have been effective in the Senate, but there too I'd like to see newer leadership. 

While there's a reasonable argument that some people of my age and above still have good judgment, and that judgment is the most important attribute of a leader, I think it's mistaken.  Leadership is many things, judgment only part of it. So somehow I'd like to see the Democrats come up with a new candidate for the presidency in 2024, but one with good chances of winning, and one who will help candidates for other offices on the ballot. Maintaining control of the Senate will be difficult; the map is against us.  Continuing to make progress in state legislatures and governorships is very important. 

Passing of an Era--1980?

 Currently reading Sen. Leahy's memoir. He entered the Senate in 1974 and was barely re-elected in 1980. It's an easy read, anecdotal and more about persons than policy or procedure.

One point--Reagan's victory in 1980 swept out a bunch of Democratic senators; only Leahy and Gary Hart of the 1974 Watergate class survived in the Senate.  Was this the turning point to partisanship?  He mentions Carter's farewell address, which included a warning against single-interest organizations. I think the reality is that organizations trying to influence Congress have become more and more specialized over the years.  For example, we used to have the "farm lobby", composed of three big national organizations--Farm Bureau, Grange, National Farmers Union. But over time single commodity groups have become more important and more wide-spread.

I've got a couple books in my library queue about the growth of partisan politices; both of which I think go back to the 1990's, but not before.

Thanksgiving Memories

 On a farm, with animals, Thanksgiving Day is like any other.  The cows have to be fed and milked, the manure has to be moved to the spreader and spread, the hens have to be fed, the eggs have to be gathered.

Since we raised chickens, that, not turkey, was our Thanksgiving entree.  It was still special; you might expect we were eating chicken regularly but not so.  Chickens laid eggs, that was their role in our ecosystem.  As you only eat your seed corn in desperate times you don't eat your egg layers.

The usual menu IIRC was chicken, mashed potatoes (bought), and green beans (canned from the garden), with pie for desert. 

Typically it was just the four of us at the table, which might mean conflict.  Or not.

After the meal and some rest, the routines resumed.  More milking, more feeding, more egg gathering, cleaning and packing.

What Are Humans?

Two possible pictures of humans:

• humans are like plants, developing from seeds and easily manipulated and suppressed.  Think of Japanese bonsai, or how seedlings will fail under adverse conditions.
• humans are talented and adaptable, coping with and exploiting every sort of environment.  Think of Nazi concentration camps and their survivors.

Okay, now think back a century or two and consider women--which picture comes closer to describing their situation?  Patriarchal suppression or exploiting separate spheres? 

The Clarity of Hindsight

 The consensus of historians is the cause of the Civil War was slavery.  Evidence includes the assertions of many Southern leaders, as documented in the secession resolutions.

A few people have worried about a new civil war. I don't share that worry, but out of my contrarian spirit I wonder this: if we were to have a new civil war, what would be the cause? 

[Added: my point is that everything is clearer in hindsight.]

SCOTUS Standards

 NYTimes reports on a letter sent to Chief Justice Roberts claiming a leak of the decision in 2014 in the Hobby-Lobby case.  Although the writer relates it to the leak of the Dobbs draft decision this year, I don't see it as such.  I'm sure over the years justices have told friends and relatives which way a decision went, before the release of the opinion. Speculation on the Dobbs decision focused on whether it was an attempt to freeze or change the decision: a different thing.

What's concerning is the efforts to lobby the justices by becoming friends, efforts which Roberts and Justice Kennedy rebuffed, but Scalia and Thomas were open to. But I don't know where you draw the line; I can't expect justices never to make friends with interests which will come before the court.  The friendship of RBG and Nina Tottenberg is an example: while she claims  to be an objective reporter, it's clear to anyone where her sympathies lie.  

So what's the standards Kennedy and Roberts used? 

Make the Ivory Castle Into a Museum

 Politico has a piece on the fight for space on the Mall for the various museums. Everyone wants recognition.  In the old days we had the Freer, then we added an Asian art museum and an African Art museum underground. But these days, following in the paths of the National Museum of the American Indian and the National Museum of African American Art and Culture Congress is now trying to add museums for Latinos/Hispanics and Women on the Mall, despite laws which would prohibit the proposed sites.  In my lifetime we've added memorials for the Vietnam war, the Korean war, and World War II as well. We've added monuments for Ike, FDR, and MLK on or near the Mall, as well as the Holocaust museum.

What's next?  The obvious one is a "National Museum of Asian and Pacific Islander X".  But how about honoring the brave veterans of our longest wars, if not the bloodiest?  I think the potential demand is infinite, and it's an easy way for Congress to please an interest group.

Given the unending demand, I suggest we start repurposing buildings on the Mall, starting with the Administration building for USDA. When I joined ASCS in 1968 Chet Adell used to call it the "ivory tower", an indication of his disdain for the decisions made there (he was a key figure in implementing them). It's the only bureaucratic HQ on the Mall--so tear it down and use the site for a couple of the new museums.  Once we've set that precedent, we can go onto repurposing other of the structures.  

Bureaucrat Love

 Love to see this:

Over my years in the public and private sectors, I've had people tell me: If only the government could work like business.

Well, the team at @USEdgov and @USDS built a Student Loan Forgiveness portal that processed 8 MILLION applications in the first 30 hours without a crash. https://t.co/VaaoTMVycg

— Ronald Klain (@WHCOS) November 15, 2022

Win, Win, Taxpayer Lose

 The Times had an article yesterday on the lawsuit against the Trump organization.  As I understand it, two employees have pled guilty for fraud--not reporting as income benefits they got from company, like tuition for kids, cars, etc.  But the suit is against the organization so the government must prove that their manipulations of the accounts to provide these unreported benefits were "in behalf of" the organization. Apparently it's a big issue.

With my bias against TFG it seems clear to me.  It was a "win, win" deal for the two employees--they got more compensation from the company through the manipulation without doing anything more for it.  What did the company gain? Presumably the employees were providing services worth their total compensation.

For example, assume the employee got $500K in taxable income, making $350K after taxes. He also got $250K in benefits under the table, the taxes on which would have been $75K  So the employee nets $600 K, the company pays $750K, and the US gets $150K  The US should have gotten  $75K more. So it's a win, win for the two employees, a loss for the US taxpayer.

How about the company? It's simple accounting, if someone loses, someone must gain. So who gained the $75K--I say the company, assuming a free market for the employee's services.  In such a market to hire the employee they'd have to pony up $825 in taxable gross salary and benefits.  

No to Trump

 I've mentioned the conservatives at Powerline blog breaking with Trump.  They apparently got a lot of flak about the break from the people commenting.  So they did a quick poll on whether Trump should be the candidate in 2024.  The results suprised me--very strongly anti-Trump. So the Republicans are shifting away, perhaps, and definitely you can't judge the readership of a blog by its commenters.

The Ghost in the Administration

 I've read more books on the Trump administration than I should. The books usually  treat some people worse than others.  Jared Kushner and Ivanka do well sometimes, very poorly in other books. And so forth for other major players.

One player who seems to have been able to survive without major enemies, or at least without participating in major controversies. is Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin.  The sole issue in my readings for which I remember him being criticized  is his opposition to banning travel from Europe early in the pandemic.  

Otherwise he seems to have operated quietly, not being criticized by Trump when everyone else was.  I may have missed some criticism since I wasn't conscious of his invisibility from the beginning.

His memoir would be interesting, to see how he did it.

Post-Election Thoughts

 I'm expecting the Republicans to control the House, assuming that Kelly will win and Masto lose, and fearful Sen. Warnock will not be able to repeat his runoff victory.  

I'd also predict there will be at least one senator leave Congress during 2023-4 due to health.

I'd predict the 2024 nomination will be between DeSantis and Youngkin.

A "Giant Anvil"?

 A quote from John Hinderaker's post-election analysis:

"At this point, Trump is a giant anvil around the neck of the Republican Party. In many areas, likely most, he is absolute poison. To be associated with Trump is to lose. Pretty much everything he has done in the last two years has been not just ill-advised but massively destructive to the Republican Party and to the United States."

 

Election Day

 My wife, my cousin and I are all uptight about the results of today's election. Of the three of us I may be the most relaxed.  As I see it, we've survived Nixon, Reagan, and Trump so far, so we can survive a possible Republican control of Congress for 2 years.

What happens in 2024? Who knows. I wouldn't bet on Biden, Harris, or Trump winning the presidency, although I would bet on the Republicans winning the Senate in 2024 (the map really really favors them--so much so Mr. Thiessen in the Post speculates that if the Republicans pick up 4 Senate seats this year, they'll have a good chance at 60 in 2024--that's disastrous). 

But predictions tend to extrapolate the current situation into the future, which may not be true down the road.  People will get tired of Trump, and Trump-like pols.  I've already seen a post at Powerline blog, the most conservative one I follow, hoping Trum isn't the nominee in 2024.  

It's all very interesting. 

9600 Baud--Those Were the Days

 Kevin Drum delves into the past to get his telescope working. In this case the past is likely >30years. And the lesson is, even with IT, don't judge everything by its looks.

I remember the actual original mo-dem (modulator-demodulator).  Never bought one, but used one, very briefly. 

Looking Towards the Election,

 For the past 3 national elections I've been fairly optimistic: disappointed in 2016, pleased in 2018 (though I tend to forget Republican gains in the Senate; happy in 2020.  My optimism in each case was based on the polls.

Recently the polls have turned against the Democrats so I'm not optimistic for Tuesday (and the days and weeks after, since it may take that long to finally resolve some races). I won't venture predictions on the results.

A New Constitutional Convention? No.

 The Constitution has a provison for holding a new constitutional convention whose powers would be essentially unlimited (just as the original convention far exceeded its authority).  A number of states over the years have called for such a convention, and there's been recent discussion of it.

Lyman Stone doesn't connect the two, but his twitter thread on the faults of the 1982 Canadian constitution provide me evidence to argue against a broadbrush revision:

Canada's 1982 constitution is a lulzy document which was passed with little serious consideration and a large number of wild drafting decisions with massive unanticipated consequences.

— Lyman Stone 石來民 🦬🦬🦬 (@lymanstoneky) November 3, 2022

If You Want Meritocracy, Go to Ireland

 What I learned today.

Interesting thing about Ireland’s university system is it’s very meritocratic and no one really objects to that

— Ronan (@rfitz77) November 2, 2022

I confirmed there's no legacies or athletic admissions in the Irish system. That's for the Irish.  

But if you want to study there, here's the site. 

Security for Ballot Drop Boxes

 Seems there's a controversy in AZ over a group which wants to put watchers over poll drop boxes, armed watchers.  The argument against is it's intimidating.  

I believe in transparency, but it seems to me the best approach is to put video camera(s) up, so people can watch in real time.  The video could be stored and analyzed later if necessary.

Affirmative Action--Three Posts

SCOTUS considers affirmative action today, the occasion for lots of comments; Three blog posts of note: 

• Kevin Drum argues from the experience of California in prohibiting AA that it doesn't make that much difference.  Kevin would prefer class-based action.
• David Bernstein refers to his book on racial/ethnic classification in today's context. He argues that the groupings the Federal government uses are illogical and never designed for the purposes for which they are used.  
• Steven Hayward publishes a chart showing the distribution of SAT scores by group. I found two things surprising: the degree of Asian-American dominance (25 percent in in the top category) and the fact that the group which was next highest in the top category was--wait for it--mixed race. 

Mistakes in Pandemic

 Reading "Uncontrolled Spread" by Scott Gottlieb on the US response to Covid19. So far (100pp in) it's good. Gottlieb was on the outside (former Trump FDA director for a couple years) but offering input via Twitter and close enough to people on the inside to be knowledgable. 

Those who attack the medical establishment often cite the confusing advice about masks in the early months of the pandemic.  Gottlieb says both CDC and FDA relied on their experience in dealing with flu epidemics, assuming that Covid-19 would be like the flu, SARS and MERs.  They were tracking respiratory cases using their "syndrome" system, which relied on reports filtering up from Medicare and hospitals, using statistical analysis to try to determine if there was a surge in cases which might mean a new virus.  The system had defects--it was after-the-fact--and not precise.

Dr. Birx made much of the failure to identify asymptomatic spread. Gottlieb also notes the problem, with an interesting consequence.  Some early cases, which we now recognize as resulting from asymptomatic spread which isn't usual in influencza, were instead explained by fomites--the idea that the virus was deposited on surfaces.  This meant the early emphasis on handwashing and cleaning surfaces, and the discouraging of masks. 

It's the Best of Times

Lyman Stone is an ex-USDA bureaucrat with an interesting take on many things (demography, religion being two of the big ones).  This morning he tweeted things weren't too bad.

the world is actually fairly okay. there is no compelling reason for anyone with a job in a rich country to be miserable and angry all the time. inequality mostly doesn't impact most peoples' daily lives. the best evidence we have suggests it's been falling for a few years now. https://t.co/yg3vZtJTLB

— Lyman Stone 石來民 🦬🦬🦬 (@lymanstoneky) October 27, 2022

That was in response to a tweet by Claudia Sahm, an economics professor with a dismal outlook, at least today.

Today the sun is out after a spell of cloudy days, so my mood is improved.  I'd claim now the world is in better shape than ever before.  People are living longer and better, with more access to more options and more information than ever before. That's especially true of what we used to call the Third World. 

 

Republican Hypocrisy--1990's and Now

 I may be one of the few who remember the scandal which plagues the Clinton administration in the 1990s.  No, not Monica, but Charlie Trie and John Huang.

Anyone interested can read this collection of Post articles, For those too lazy   busy to do the reading, the capsule summary is that the Democrats accepted donations from various individuals, either Chinese or Chinese-Americans, which might have violated or indeed did violate laws on permissible political donations.  The Republicans pointed at sleaze, claimed the money originated in China, were intended as bribes for favorable treatment and friendly attitudes by the government, and must be investigated by a special counsel.

If I recall, because I'm too lazy to research, the scandal eventually petered out with. Some cases ended in not guilty findings, some in plea bargains, some were more smoke than fire, some were fuzzy areas in the laws.

I'm now reading Andrew Weissmann's "Where the Law Ends: Inside the Mueller Investigation".  I'll comment on the book another time, but what's striking is the degree to which the Trump campaign welcomed Russian aid, specifically the hacks of the DNC and DCC.  Granted there's a difference between money and other kinds of aid, but I don't remember Republicans criticizing the campaign for doing so.  

Forgotten History

Either the Post or the Times today had a piece on the effects of using primaries to select candidates, with the main argument being that primaries widened the gaps between parties and increased partisanship.  I don't have the patience to find the url.

The overall thesis may be right; I won't dispute it. But one sentence I did dispute--describing the time frame during which primaries became important.  It wasn't the 1980s, but earlier. 

For example, in the 1960 campaign, JFK and Hubert Humphrey were the main competitors in several state primaries. I acknowledge not every state held presidential primaries, but effectively JFK won the nomination by winning the primaries.  In 1960, and before, the selection process was a composite: "party bosses", the man in a given state or often a major citywho could sway the selection of delegates to the convention, and "favorite sons" usually the governor or highest elected official in the state who also could sway delegates.  (The "bosses" were behind the scenes; the "sons" might or might not have dreams of becoming the nominee themselves.)

Today states use primaries, in 1960 the bosses and sons relied on the primaries to assess the strength of candidates, rather like polls today. 

Our Limited Vision

Marginal Revolution pointed to this Ezra Klein piece on housing for the homeless in LA. Interesting, encapsulated for me in this quote from one of the mayoral candidates.:

Funders don’t want to give you general operating costs. They want you to solve their pet issue. What I always wanted was money for general operating costs.”

She's talking about her experience as an NGO exec, but the problem is universal. Every problem which Klein identifies, and there are so many neither he nor his readers will come away optimistic, is the result of proponents having tunnel vision, pushing a good idea into law or the courts without reckoning for the effects.  

Liberals criticize capitalism for ignoring exogenous effects of the market economy.  We also need to recognize that our good ideas will also have exogenous effects.

Birx Book

 I've commented on it before.  Some bits:

• US has 574 Indian/Native American nations.
• Jared Kushner comes off as helpful and capable in this book, unlike other recent books where he and his young crew are mocked.
• Seema Verma is mentioned favorably.
• Birx doesn't come across as very flexible--she's focused on data, and keeps referring to the UP/CHop model, always emphasizing asymptomatic spreading. I don't know whether there any consensus has developed over the issue.
• She's down on CDC and portrays Redfield, the CDC head, as unable to move his bureaucracy in the directions she believes it should have gone, though he's one of the group of doctors (Fauci, Hahn, Redfield, and Birx who agreed to hang together). She thinks CDC should have people in the field with the state health departments (I didn't read her extensive set of recommendations at the end of the book).n
• She's no writer, so I did a lot of skimming in the last half. 
• She has an extensive list of recommendations, which I didn't study.  Now have Scott Gottlieb's book on the pandemic which seems also to look to the future. 

Weaponized Globalization

 Here's the first of a thread in which Henry Farrell updates the thesis of a previous book in light of today's developments:

1. Six stories in the last few days about the weaponization of the world economy. It's very strange for @ANewman_forward and me to see the logic of our 2019 article (and forthcoming book - Underground Empire - Holt 2023) playing out. https://t.co/Z742KIljsl

— Henry Farrell (@henryfarrell) October 12, 2022

The thread is interesting. But I've a "but".  I remember back in the early Clinton administration when there was a big controversy over export controls on 486 chips (the hot PC cpu of the day). The Times made a big thing out of it, in my view misunderstanding  the problems of coordinating regulations between two cabinet departments.  Anyhow, Moore's law quickly made the 486 a dead issue.  It suggests to me that the "weaponization" which Farrel describes might be a bit more impressive on the surface, than it is when you get into the details. 

Bottom line: It's difficult for bureaucrats to keep up with innovation; even more difficult for Congress to keep up.

The Importance of History

Just getting back to the blog after a trip to NY Sheep and Wool. 

Noted something this morning on the holes in the sanctions on Russia--Greek oil tankers are getting a break.  The article referenced the large role Greeks play in oil shipments.

Led me to think of Aristotle Onassis, of Jackie fame.  Also of an early scandal after WWII when Greeks picked up cheap ships from war surplus.  

And finally to the Iliad and Greek ships.  I wonder, has Greece always been prominent in shipping since Troy?  Is that culture, or is it geography? 

Hybrid Tanks

 Remember that TFG had big problems with the Ford aircraft carrier--the latest and best USN warship?  He told the Navy to go back to steam-powered catapualts instead of the electromagnetic ones they were pioneering.  Navy ignored him.

Just imagine what he'll think of the new Abrams tank the Army is getting.  It's a hybrid--I guess on the model of a prius though this doesn't give details. Presumably the diesel (rather than gas turbine) drives a generator to the battery which feeds electric motors.  Advantages in fuel consumption and a "silent" mode of operation.

Disadvantages, which the TFG will note:  it's new and therefore will having bugs.

The Force of the Job

 Had a brief discussion about whether Republican victories in 2022 and 2024 would destroy our democracy.  My position is firm: No.

Why? First I define our democracy as continuing to have free elections with winners taking office and losers leaving. (I'm not worrying here about restrictions on the ballot in any real sense.) 

Next I believe in what I can call the "force of the job", which I think we saw working in 2020 and which will continue.  Theoretically our allegiance is to the United States, but in reality our allegiance is to ourselves, our family, neighbors,  etc. But part of our allegiance to ourselves is the widespread desire to do the job.  In the end in 2020 election officials did the job, judges and courts did the job, the police on Capitol Hill did the job, the military did the job--across the board people did the job. 

My prediction is twofold:

• the vast majority of people will continue to be in the system for mundane reasons with no burning desire to see Trump or Biden or whoever break the system.
• those who come into the system supporting Trump with the hope of seeing him elected in 2024 (or similar political desires) will find themselves gradually placing the integrity of their job and themselves over politics--the job (and their co-workers) will be more important than politics. So, in the end, they will do their job, just as the people involved on Jan 6 did their job.

The Problem of Too Many Choices

 Had to buy a clothes washer today.  Our old Magtag broke after 23 years so we were plunged into a world of many options; many new manufacturers (LG, Samsung, Medea) since the last time we bought, new alternatives (Consumer Reports seems to recommend front loaders now, not the top loading impeller used by our old machine, but there are pros and cons to all. Prices are higher now. IIRC the last time we bought the price range was $250 to $800, and ours was right in the middle. This time the range seemed to be $450 to $1.5K, and our purchase towards the low end.

Passed up one option because it had too many options, too complicated for two older people, even though the salesman recommended it as the best value ($400 off the list price--I wonder how many are really sold at the list prices.)

All the choices made for a stressful day, but the choice is made, the money is paid, and the machine comes tomorrow.

On Pot

 I suspect I've written on the subject before, but the president just pardoned everyone convicted of marijuana possession under federal law, and recommended that governors do the same with regards to state law. I noticed in the media today a poll in which a majority of Americans, a sizeable majority, favored the legalization of marijuana.

I'm ambivalent. I think the argument from alcohol and prohibition is strong. I've no experience with marijuana, though I'm open to using edibles if my arthritis gets worse. But a question: if you legalize marijuana, what else: heroin, crack, etc.?  I'm not sure where society could draw the line.

My major concern is change.  It will take some time for society to implement legalization. So far it appears that different states have taken different approaches with perhaps different results. Ideally in the eyes of this bureaucrat when the first couple states started legalizing the feds would have set up a cross-agency group (i.e DOJ, HHS, FDA, etc.) to track how the states were approaching it.  It would share experiences and study results.

We've learned to live with alcohol, not perfectly, but we accept the costs, the addictions, the accidents. But we've been coping with alcohol for decades; we may need a similar time for pot. 

Upgrading to Windows 11

 I understand Microsoft is ending the free upgrade from Win 10 to Win 11 tomorrow. So I went through the process to upgrade the desktop my wife and I share. Eventually I got it done, but next time I think I'll just buy a new desktop for her. 

Housing Codes--Needed or Not?

Some bloggers, maybe all bloggers, have a hobbyhorse.  Matt Yglesias fights against zoning codes, arguing that home prices would be lower if anyone could build anything on any land they own. [In fairness to him, I'm sure I'm exaggerating his position. 

Meanwhile FCW has a post praising the "faceless bureaucrats", which is my hobbyhorse, for their work in enforcing housing codes.  Matt hasn't commented on that.  I suppose he'd probably argue that building codes are essential,  that when he writes "build anything" he doesn't really mean "anything", but buildings built to fulfill their purpose.  That may be a slippery slope, however.

The Big Sort

[Note: I drafted this several days ago but didn't publish.  Then I wrote yesterdays post. Although I never added the links, I ]

I've played with the idea that our big sort  resulted from the proliferation of housing developments after WWII. 

Today from pieces in my two newpapers I'm more persuaded by another factor:

• The Post had a graphic showing how population had shifted--people had moved from the smaller states to the bigger states, presumably the big metropolitan areas within the states (i.e., Massachusetts, New York, DC, Texas, Florida, California.
• The Times had a graphic showing the party splits in presidential elections from 1988 to 2020.  You see some states moving to the Democrats (Virginia, Colorado, New Jersey) and some states moving to the Republicans, and other states become more of what they were before (especially Dakotas)

So my new idea is the younger Democrats are moving to economic opportunity. The nation has emphasized the value of higher education since the 1940's.  The jobs for college graduates tend to be in the bigger metropolitan areas, not in the more rural ones. 

Take a look at the rankings of states by education level.  Eyeballing the HS graduation, it looks as if the non-Southern Republican stats do very well. The South and NY (40th) are low  and CA ( is at the bottom. When you change to bachelors degrees the picture changes drastically.  NY has jumped from 40th to  10th, CA  to 14th, and the top is dominated by Democratic states.  When you go to advanced degrees the spread at the top widens a lot.

Where are the divisions? 

They identify four areas of gradually deepening division: economic inequality, political partisanship, and questions of identity relating to race, as well as gender and sexuality.

From wikipedia:

 Additionally, since the 1970s, income disparities have disproportionately increased in metropolitan areas due to the concentration of high-skilled jobs in urban zones.[10][11] For example, even though New York is the state with the highest inequality levels in the country, the upstate part of the state has a much lower rate of income inequality than the downstate, as the economy of New York City (Gini index 0.5469)[12] is highly reliant on high-salary earners.[11] States with better financial development tend to be more unequal than those with worse financial opportunities, but the trends go in the opposite directions for high-income and low-income states, with the former actually seeing more equality up to a certain level of development, beyond which the inequality rises non-linearly

The Big Sort and Rural Migration

 Can't find sources for my guesses.  This is the closest, showing the ratio of women to men in rural areas went from 99.8 in 1990 to 99.0 in 2000. My guesses are:

• in the old days, women were more conservative in rural areas, men could migrate to urban areas for jobs, both manufacturing and others.
• smart rural women could find jobs as teachers.
• smart rural men went to college and ended up in jobs in urban and suburban areas.
• the sex ratio was heavier female (despite the "norwegian bachelor farmers")
• in the modern world more women go to college and end up in jobs in urban and suburban areas.
• women are now more into social issues and tending to be liberal.

The forgoing focuses on out-migration, but there's also in-migration, from suburban/rural areas to rural. I think when it happens it's generally older people, who also tend to be more conservative.

The combination of all these trends means rural areas have become less Democratic and more conservative; urban areas the opposite.

No Hemp in Texas

The dream of legal hemp, of a new crop which can save the farm, is often just a dream.  So it seems in Texas.

I remember ostrichs, and llamas, and a handful of exotic plants which were permitted on "set-aside" acreage back in the 1970's.  All dreams which turned into nightmares for those who gambled on them. 

Boundary Setting

Who knew that we have government bureaucrats worrying about our actual borders, as opposed to migration across them?  FCW had a piece  on Trump's infamous Schedule F, which described the two agencies which had reported their plans to OPM.  One was OMB, as you'd expect.  The other:

Over at the U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission, only five of the agency’s 234 employees were slated to move into Schedule F. The agency submitted its plan on Jan. 19, 2021, and OPM was unable to review the proposal before Biden rescinded the executive order.

Officials at the agency, which applies boundary and water treaties between the U.S. and Mexico, said the expedited hiring and firing offered by Schedule F was appealing to senior leaders, particularly given the location of its offices in remote locations along the southern border.

Have Rules on Agencies Sharing Data Changed?

 FCW reports on a White House deal about improving the nation's health and food situation.  Reading between the lines it sounds as if some of the plans involve USDA and other agencies sharing data so they can improve participation in USDA food programs. 

That may be mistaken, but 30 years ago there was a law restricting our ability to share data.  I wonder whether that's changed or is now being ignored, or maybe privacy advocates no longer wish to oppose such deals? 

States Rights and Bureaucracy

 Reading Dr. Deborah Brix's "Silent Invasion", her memoir of her work in the pandemic. It's basically chronological, and I'm just about 2 weeks in.

She is trying to maneuver among the various camps in the Trump administration:

• economics interests such as Sec. Mnuchin and Larry Kudlow, worried about economic impacts.
• politicos like Joe Grogan worried about political impacts.
• CDC scientists worried about science and being right.
• HHS bureaucrats who worry about implementation.
• Poli-scis, like Bob Redfield who's head of CDC and Tony Fauci, who's reluctant to get beyond the data.

Based on her experience in Pepfar--fighting HIV in Africa, she believes in the importance of data and worries about asymptomatic spread of virus.  She's also concerned about being a woman in a male world and an outsider/newcomer to the administration's effort.

Most of all she's concerned about maneuvering the players towards what she sees as important. 

A big hurdle is the lack of timely detailed data.  She explains that CDC did not require data from the states; indeed they were afraid of antagonizing state officials and had the history of coaxing them to cooperate.  I see this as fitting into a pet idea of mine--the fact that few federal government bureaucracies directly deal with citizens--FSA being one of the few. 

The Future of the Chinese Military

 Putting together this Powerline post, which includes a graph projecting China's population to 2100, which shows it crashing.  Meanwhile Mr. Kilcullen in his book notes the "little emperor" syndrome, with parents and grandpartents focusing attention on their one child/grandchild. He argues that it will make China's leaders very reluctant to incur casualties in a war. 

Sputnik and Equity

 An article on "equity", which is tl:dr, but it's a hook for a memory--we're coming up on the 55th anniversary of the launch of Sputnik, which set off a panic. The wikipedia article is rather narrowing focused. My memory is that education was impacted as well--sputnik was seen as reflecting weaknesses in US schools, particularly in math and science.  There was also a perceived lack of focus on talent; education schools were seen as under the influence of John Dewey and progressive education.

Part of the response to Sputnik was the 1958 National Defense Education Act, which included student aid and an emphasis of science.

We didn't talk about equity back then, but it seems the pendulum has swung the other way now.

Organic Cotton--Benefits Other Than Yield?

 Here's an assessment of the impact of growing organic cotton in India. It seems the  result is not higher yields (no surprise) but the benefits which are less tangible. I note the support from a number of NGO's and the psychic rewards of being involved in something of a crusade, or at least a good cause, rather than just grubbing for the added dollar.  

A cynic would believe that those who chase the monetary rewards will, in the long run, win out. 

 

Kilcullen II

 I blogged previously about David Kilcullen's book.  Not done yet. 

Interesting discussion of the Russia military, particularly in light of their performance in the Ukraine.   One striking bit is the idea of "escalate to descalate"--fast, aggressive strikes to establish a position where resistance is unlikely.  

One example was the Georgian war.  It seems as if the original Russian plan for Ukraine 2022 was the same--a fast strike to decapitate Ukrainian leadership, take Kyviv before NATO could respond.  There's also the possible use of nuclear weapons--small nukes (300 ton TNT equivalent)--use them early betting that retaliation will be hindered by the need for an alliance to coordinate.

Kilcullen describes the evolution of the Russian military since the breakup of the Soviet Union, but might have been surprised that the reforms haven't been as effective in Ukraine as they were thought to be.

Hasidic School in New York

 NYTimes recently ran an article, seeming to show that because of their political clout, Hasidic schools spend most of their time on religious subjects, slighting the basics, which mean their students, particularly boys, do not pass state exams. The article has led to a lot of discussion.

When you have a diverse society, we have a problem in drawing lines. Over my life the society has often backed off an original decision: no facial hair for military, no afros, no turbans for Sikhs, etc. The Amish do schooling up through 8th grade only, and don't participate in Social Security.  There's no problem with the hijab and the burka, the sari and the whatever, though low-slung jeans that show underwear are, or were, controversial.

There's always been controversies over books in school, not to mention the behavior of teachers.  No pregnant teachers in the past, no beards, etc. We once wanted books which embodied the Protestant version of Christianity.  I don't remember whether, when we said the Lord's Prayer every morning in my school, whether we said "debts" or "trespasses". 

There's always tension between the authority/teachings of the professional teacher and the authority/teachings of the parents (and these days, between parents who are separated or divorced).

I wonder how nations who are more diverse than the US, such as India or Indonesia, handle the lines.  I doubt we'll ever get consensus on the lines.  

Vertical Farming

 Here's the "manifesto" of a bunch of vertical farming outfits.

I still wonder about profitability. 

Watch Out for Biplanes

 They killed the last two American troops who were attacked from the air (towards the end of the Korean war.)

That factoid from David Kilcullen's The Dragons and the Snakes: How the Rest Learned to Fight the West. I'm about 100 pages in, finding it interesting and convincing.  So far he's using an ecological/evolutionary approach to the recent history (say from 1991 on) of war, and the changes in how the opposing parties have changed their tactics and strategies, mostly learning from defeats.

One observation is that NSA can gather much more data than they can analyze. Terrorist/insurgent organizations don't rely on privacy laws, but on hiding in the woods of all the other data. I think that also applies to the average citizen--we get lost in the mass of data, so we don't need to be paranoid. 

Future Job Losses--Data Entry, Secretaries

 Ran into a projection of occupantions predicted to lose jobs over the next 10 years. Don't have the link. As I recall, data entry types, secretaries, and (personal/executive) assistants were big losers.

My guess is that's continuing a trend as the impact of computing and the internet affects office work.  As we develop systems online more of the data entry is outsourced to the user, the customers.  Even IRS may be moving in that direction. And the secretary/assistant category likely reflects moving work from "auxiliaries" to their "principals", both a move from formal communications (letters with multiple copies) to informal (email and texts with electronic copies) and the increased capabilities of software.  Bottom line: people believe it's faster and more efficient to do their own email than to have an auxiliary do it; easier to arrange their own travel; easier to be available for texts and calls on cellphones with software tools for screening than to rely on human screeners.  

There might also be a decline in the value of "servants" (which after all is what secretaries and assistants are) in signalling status.  We don't notice it, but I think there may be a decline in the number of chauffeurs, butlers, chefs the rich have these days, at least compared to the very rich.   There may be an exception for entertainers, like athletes and movie stars.  The premium on the physical, both fitness and appearance, means it's worth paying for personal trainers, hairdressers, etc.  

Me and Drezner

 I always found Dan Drezner interesting to follow, on twitter, blogging, and in the Post.  Now he's moved to Substack and is trying to drum up readership.

He offered three contrarian positions for consideration as possibly attracting interest.

Here's my comments:

Trump voters? May not be that interesting.  Remember the yellow dog Democrats? We have rattlesnake Republicans, people who've always voted Republican and will continue to do so.  I grew up in upstate NY where if you wanted a choice, you voted in the Republican primary.  It took Goldwater's candidacy to break the hold, at least for a while.

Globalization? I'm too old to change from being a free trader.  We don't yet know how to have a good safety net for those displaced by it, but I was one of the liberals in the 60's and 70's who opposed Ike's "trade, not aid" (IIRC).  Turns out he was righter than we thought. I can't get past the changes in what we called the Third World..  Anti-globalism is just an example of the thermostatic effect on a world scale.

Pandemic northingburger?  That's too obvious to be interesting, at least when confined to IR. Sociologically, a different story.

Events Which Change Elections

NYTimes newsletter from Nate Cohn discussing election polls, also whether the Clinton indictment was a possible parallel to the impact of Dobbs on the campaign.

In comments there I suggested that Sputnik was in some ways comparable--a surprise event, raising the importance of a new issue, close enough to impact the 1958 elections in which Dems did very well --48 House and 15 Senate.

It helped that there was a recession in 58 and Ike was in his second term. It set the stage for JFK's pledge to get the nation moving and for the (false) concerns about "missile gap."

Plastic in the Ocean

 Fairfax has recently banned plastic shopping bags.  I've seen calculations of how many times you'd have to use a durable shopping bag of different types to balance the impact of plastic bags on the ecology.  What the calculations miss is the cost of collecting bags from the landscape, and the seascape. which must easily make the durable bags worthwhile. Bottom line: you have to calculate the cleanup costs to have an accurate picture.

When in Trouble...

 When in trouble or in doubt

Run in circles scream and shout.

Herman Wouk--Caine Mutiny  

(My memory is Wouk made it seem like a quotation, but it seems it was original with him.)

For Politicians:

When in trouble or in doubt

Spend money any amount.

Does Studying History Pay?

 Saw a chart of earnings by field of study in a newspaper today.  Interesting enough "history" earned more than computer programmer. (The thrust of the article was that students were being pushed towards STEM majors.)

Government Salaries

 Today in the NYTimes Magazine the ethics column written by Prof. Attiah has a letter from a young attorney-to-be, who will have $150K in student loans and dislikes the idea of working for a big firm where:

The salary would be enough for me to pay off my loans, help my family and establish a basic standard of living for myself — plus maybe own a house or even save for retirement, which would be impossible for me on a public-interest or government salary.

I'm not sure what the writer thinks a "basic standard of living" involves. FWIW new attorneys for the federal government start at about $56K (with locality adjustments). 

When Did Ass Become (Semi-)Proper?

 An article in the Harvard Magazine described the Harvard Law experience of a woman who preceded RBG (Orin Kerr linked to it in a tweet).  The author describes a class where women were grilled over past legal cases with language which would be embarassing.  Hers was a case involving a farmer's ass (donkey) who got out onto the road.  This happened in 1956, a year I remember well enough to know that "ass" was never mentioned in polite society; neither was "butt" for that matter, except in the context of cigarettes.  

I've been struck by changes in language usage over the years--"ass" being one.  These days it seems pretty common in the print media, much more so in entertainment.  So I decided to do an ngram search. In America its frequency of usage seems to take off in the mid '90's, reaching a peak in 2014 and declining slightly since.  (The British usage pattern differs.)

Unbelievable--So Much for White Superiority

The other day the Times had an article discussing the composition of the cabinet selected by PM Truss, which notably had no white males in the top four positions. Rather buried in the depths of the article was this fact: 

In part, the gains in government by people of color reflect social change and advances through education. On average, ethnic minority pupils have outperformed white Britons at school in recent years. In every year from 2007 to 2021, white pupils had the lowest entry rate into higher education.

I'm used to looking at the various breakdowns of statistics about our society and seeing what I might call the "usual suspects"--that is, Euro-Americans or Asian-Americans at the top, if the statistic relates to something good (wealth, income, etc.) and Afro-Americans and Hispanic-Americans at the bottom. The positions reversed if the statistic relates to crime, helath, life expectancy, etc.

We see that so often we, at least I,  start thinking it's the expected order, which is just a step away from being "natural". 

But this statistic from the UK upsets those expectations. And it raises the key question: what the hell is going on; why the difference in societies? 

The Hero in History

 As part of a seminar on historiography I had to read Sidney Hook's book with this title.  Still have the paperback somewhere in the house, and I can remember the crimson cover, but not anything of its contents.

The issue is and was whether the individual can influence the course of history. The answer I give now, whether or not it represents Hook's conclusions: it depends, sometimes "yes", sometimes "no". 

It partly depends on the level of analysis. A story today in the Post on the death and burial of a WWII paratrooper, who fought heroically and was part of the force liberating a slave labor/concentration camp, where he formed a connection with a 17-year old inmate. He began working for peace.  Did he change the world?  No, 

Gorbachev died the other day--he changed history. You can safely say the Cold War would not have ended in the way it did if any other communist leader had been in office. 

Jury Duty and Historians

 I had jury duty for one month when I lived in DC. A big room of us gathered in the morning, waiting around for a panel to be called or for the manager to call it a day.  It was boring, but the juries were interesting. I think I was called for 4 cases, got on three juries.  The fourth was a marijuana case.  I took the position that I couldn't be objective and was excused by the judge. I look back on that now with some amazement--I think in the same situation today (though I'm too old for Fairfax juries) I probably wouldn't say a thing.  Did my opinion of pot change? Perhaps. But I don't remember ever believing in legalizing it; decriminalize it was, I think, my likely position in the early 1970's. These days I don't know; I've probably voted to legalize it but I don't know if it's the right answer.  It's the popular position these days, but I'm not totally convinced it's working out. 

Bottomline, I'm less confident now, because I'm older, have seen more, have changed my opinions more.

How does this tie to historians?  A juror is required to put aside one's personal feelings and convictions and become an objective trier of fact.  That's what I couldn't commit to back then. I'd argue a historian as a teacher is required to do the same; as a research scholar also. 

The Role of Robots

 Matt Yglesias has a piece at substack on the need for robots, attacking the thesis that robots will take away workers jobs.

I didn't study it, but it did cause me to think about farming and robots. My impression is that robots and AI are making rapid progress. Robotic milking in dairy, self-driving tractors, flame-throwing weeders, big data and precision agriculture. At least in the world of farming I don't see robots taking jobs.  What seems to be happening is two-fold:

• reduction in immigration, which mostly supply the low-end work. When TFG tries to build a wall reducing immigration, that increases the incentive for robots. When robots are developed that reduces the incentive for immigration.  
• reducing the number of real farms--most obviously in the world of dairy. The investment in robotic milkers means you need a bigger operation to make it economical, which means the big farms drive out the small dairies. 

Smiley on Farming

Jane Smiley is an award-winning novelist; her book "A Thousand Acres" is King Lear updated to 1980's Iowa.  Here she  reviews "Bet the Farm", describing a couple's return to an Iowa farm owned by her father-in-law.  It came out last year. Smiley's review annoys me, but I did put a hold on it with the Fairfax library.

I wonder if there any good books by someone who's been farming their entire life, doing it full time without a sideline providing cash income? 

Runaway Administrative Agencies

 The title is a phrase from a libertarian team's take on how to improve our politics and government. It's mentioned in passing as self-evident truth, without any suggestions that I see to make Congress more effective. 

I take exception, of course.  I am, after all, a bureaucrat.

The problem is not runaway agencies, not usually, but the failure of Congress to act so they either:

1. pass laws which don't resolve issues but insteand  kick them over to the agencies.
2. fail to act, leaving a vacuum which the courts and agencies are forced to fill. 

Weapons Maintenance

An ex-Marine writes here  about the difficulties in properly cleaning/maintaining weapons.  I wasn't a Marine, but the piece seems valid to me. 

It struck a chord because I remember the captured soldier in the early days of the Iraq war.  For a while she was made an icon of the fighting woman.  Eventually it turned out that her weapon jammed so she never fought.  I had sympathy for her.  I don't think I ever cleaned my weapon in Vietnam.  As a matter of fact, there was a screwup in getting my departure orders to me, so it was a mad dash to get to Camp LBJ and go through out-processing, one step of which was turning in my weapon. When I tried to, the guy (spec-4 maybe?) refused to take it until I cleaned it.  I tried to explain the situation, my flight was due out shortly, but he was adamant.  Finally I threw some money at him >$50<$100 and he agreed to take it.

I made my flight. 

(It seems possible that the Russian soldiers fighting in the Ukraine have been as lax in their maintenance as I was. )

Loan Forgiveness and Reparations

 Vox has a discussion of the student loan forgiveness program.  It seems to me there's a parallel between this program and proposal for reparations, most notably reparations to black Americans.

In both cases, at least part of the rationale is to redress wrongs which people have suffered in the past, and to recognize and mitigate the damage currently being suffered. (There is a difference--in the case of slavery the people who would receive the benefits would be the descendants of those wronged; in the case of student loans those who took out the loans would receive the forgiveness.  I'm assuming the death of the borrower wipes out the loan obligations, which isn't totally clear.)

In both cases, there's the problem of fixing the problem which caused the damage. In the case of loan forgiveness, it may have been a bad loan from the start, based on fraud or misjudgment by the lender or the borrower. Or it may have turned bad by subsequent events--illness of the borrower, economic hardship, failure of the college, etc. In the case of slavery the damages resulting from slavery have carried forward. 

Biden seems to be trying to correct the problems in student loans, although I get the idea  there's skepticism about the effectiveness.  So there's the fear that students will end up with bad loans in the future, and that colleges will raise tuition anticipating future forgiveness.  In the case of reparations it's not clear to me that the various proposals really address the ongoing problems.  IMO that's the big weakness of reparations.

I Had a Mickey Mantle Card Once

 A Mickey Mantle baseball card in great shape sold for some millions of dollars the other day. 

I remember my baseball card collection, based on buying bubble gum at the corner store. I don't remember whether there were three sheets of gum and one card or vice versa, or some other ratio. Anyhow I had a stack of cards maybe 3 inches high, many of which were Wayne Terwilligers (just because that's the way they did the cards--those for the best players were the rarest).

I did have a Mickey Mantle card. I think it must have either a 1952 or 1953 card because it included the fact that he had been sent down to the Royals, which was 1951.  I think my cards were Topps, which started its baseball cards in 1952. 

I was a Yankees fan (the local baseball team, the Triple Cities Triplets was a Class A farm club); more importantly my sister was a Dodgers fan so I could only be a Giants or Yankees fan.  I liked the card, but there was something different about it.  Perhaps it was a Bowman card rather than Topps.  I don't know.   I definitely didn't get it from a bubble gum package.

The other thing which sticks in memory is condition: if the $12 million card grades 9.5 out 10, mine would have graded .1 out of 10. I believe I was given it by my friend, Van M., perhaps because he had a better version. Mine was crinkled and folded, with ragged edges.  

At some point I outgrew the collection, which faded away like all such things.

Too Many Options for a Geezer

 Both software (i.e., Word) and devices (i.e., smart TV's) have too many options for an old man to understand. 

For example, we donate to WETA, meaning we can access PBS Passport streaming service.  I figured out how to do that on our PCs, though I never can remember how to get to it from the web site--the design sucks.  For 3 years we've had a Samsung smart TV.  But it's taken until today for me to figure out how to link up our weta account with the smart TV so we can see the old PBS shows on the TV.

Lesson:  don't grow old.

Feds Exchanging Data

 Matt Yglesias had a tweet:

A weird fact about the US government is the Department of Education isn’t allowed to just access the IRS data to determine which of its borrowers are eligible for forgiveness and then do the forgiveness.

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) August 26, 2022

He got a lot of replies, including one from me. I'll embed it when it pops up in my profile. 

 

Big Boom Versus Slow and Stealthy

 I think there's a spectrum of political change/reform, perhaps along more than one dimension, but at least one--scope.

For example, Biden's forgiveness of student loans is big in scope.  I'd guess it's one of the biggest changes in the student loan program in recent years.  (IIRC the Obama administration did some significant changes, moving more to a government-administered program.)

LBJ's Medicare/Medicaid program was very big in scope.  In the years since there have been smaller changes: the biggest I recall now is GWB's addition of Medicare option D--the drug coverage. Previously there was GHWB's catastrophic insurance, which got repealed rather quickly.

But it seems most changes in programs occur with smaller scope and less attention--the slow and steathy path. 

Forgiving Student Loans

 When I see the President's announcement, my Calvinism kicks in, and I'm reminded of a quote, possibly apocryphal, from Calvin Coolidge during a controversy about the repayment of our loans to the Allies in WWI which in turn was dependent on Germany's ability and willingess to pay war reparations: "they hired the money, didn't they"? 

The financing of my own college education was in a world long ago and far away, so it's irrelevant to today's issues. (Though it turns out the student loan program started in 1958 as part of our response to Sputnik.)

When I met my wife she was still burdened by her college loans, which she finally paid off.

As I tweeted, I'm in agreement with Kevin Drum's point of yesterday--what about the future: has the loan program been changed/reformed/revamped so that the moral basis for forgiving current loans won't apply in the future? As I said, my inner Calvinism is at play--we need to treat current students and future students equitably, or at least with our eyes wide open that we're being inequitable.

(The last point reminds of the lasting complaint which resulted from the mid-80's changes to Social Security--I forget the details but a small category felt they were treated unfairly.

On IRS and Taxes

 Matt Yglesias has a discussion here.  I like it.

A note on a related issue: as I understand the Inflation Reduction Act it raises much of its revenue by taking really big corporations on their profits as shown by their public accounting, what they show to their stockholders.  I've always resisted the idea that people could have two different sets of accounts, one for stockholders, one for the tax collector. I understand--whenever we mess with the tax code to allow special deductions in order to push something we like (such as investing in low-income areas of a city, etc), we deviate from my ideal.

Arms Dealings

 Got the book "Thundersticks" from the library. It's a history of the arms trade with Native Americans from the initial contact through the nineteenth century.

I've only read the first couple chapters--it seems a bit too scholarly for my current ability to focus.  But a couple things struck me:

• the pattern of arms dealing in the seventeenth century is similar to the pattern in modern times: countries/companies with advanced technology sell weapons to those who don't have the capability to produce their own.  (Natives weren't able to produce their own weapons or gunpowder, while they could make their own bullets if they could obtain the lead.) And the sales are used to influence international/intertribal politics, just as the Soviet Union/Russia sold weapons to India and the US sells to Israel and Saudi Arabia.
• what was surprising was how the natives financed their purchases.  Furs--beaver skins and deer skins, I knew.  But capturing slaves from other tribes for resale to colonists, possibly for export to the Caribbean--that was new. 

Predicting 2024 Politics and Death

 Lots of speculation already about politics in 2024, particularly the presidential race and control of Congress.

I'll venture a prediction of my own.  The Grim Reaper will have a say. We have an old President, an old fomer guy, and a bunch of old people in Congress.  Between now and November 2024 one or more of these geezers is going to kick the can which will significantly change the odds of an important outcome.

Earl Butz Was Wrong (on Cover)

 When my first boss in ASCS sent me to NC for a month to get a taste what state and county offices did, and farmer fieldmen (as district directors were called then), I spent a week in Halifax county IIRC.  The CED was sharp. It was fall so operations were slower. One day he took me out into the field, perhaps doing a spot check, don't remember.  But we stopped at a sawmill.  It had a machine, a lathe perhaps, for shaving a thin layer of wood from a rotating log. Fascinating, as I'd never seen it before.  I think the wood shavings were cut into strips which were then woven into wooden baskets.

We weren't there to look at the operation, but to get one of the workers to sign up for cost-sharing under the then Agricultural Conservation Program.  What was the practice?  A cover crop.   (Cover crops were, I think, particularly popular in the South, where there had been a lot of erosion of worn-out cotton land.)

ACP was established in the New Deal, but by 1969 it was under attack.  Republicans, led by Secretary of Agriculture Butz, argued that some, or perhaps all of the practices, increased the productivity of farms, and, therefore the farmers could and should find the practices worthwhile enough to finance and install on their own, without the carrot of a government cost-share. They also argued that items such as liming were the result of lobbying by the industry. 

There was a lot of back and forth over the fate of ACP between the Nixon administration and Congress, where the House was controlled by Democrats throughout. In the end the program was cut back, both by reducing appropriations and by inflation, and the cover crop practice and liming were eliminated. 

IMO the Butz expectation that rational self-interest would be sufficient to perpetuate widespread cover crops was disproved by the results. 

IRS Doing Your Tax Return?

 I like this part of the IRA, but I'm dubious that H&RBlock and Intuit will ever be beaten, at least not without a drastic change in American politics.

Inflation Reduction Act and Farm Debt (Ignored)

 The Times has a table describing what's in the Inflation Reduction Act.  Somehow though they miss the two provisions for farmers on farm debt relief. 

Secretary Vilsack has a press release praising the act.  He too ignores the farm debt provisions.

Ancestry Confirms the Obvious

 Ancestry.com analyzes saliva samples from their customers to provide information back to them.  In my case they've been reasonably accurate on ancestry (German and Scots-Irish, mostly) with no particular results of interest on potential health concerns. Today they added an assessment of risk-taking.  I'm shocked, shocked to learn than I'm more risk-adverse than 60 percent of the population.  

Personally, I'd rate myself as more adverse than 90 percent.

Kellyanne Conway

 Much to the disgust of my wife I'm reading Kellyanne Conway's book, Here's the Deal.  It's quite readable.  It would be one hundred pages shorter if all the people's names were excised.  She's obviously a people person, a networker.

Two points of interest so far (just at 2016 now):

• she and her husband bought a condo in Trump Tower after they married. So far she's mentioned twice that it was on the 80th floor. That didn't sound right to me, so a little google: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_World_Tower. The article says it is 72 floors, but the elevator panels list 90.  Incidentally, it was designed with "virtuosity and grandeur", according to its website.
• her father and both grandfathers all left their wives and had children with their mistresses, which the lay psyschologist will immediately use to explain her tolerance for the former guy.