Boston 1775 is a good blog on everything around the Revolution. Today in discussing the Salem gunpowder incident, he offers some words of wisdom:
"You don’t store gunpowder in a blacksmith’s shop."
Blogging on bureaucracy, organizations, USDA, agriculture programs, American history, the food movement, and other interests. Often contrarian, usually optimistic, sometimes didactic, occasionally funny, rarely wrong, always a nitpicker.
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Pseudo Science and Whole Foods
As a stockholder in Whole Foods (it's done well over the last decade or so) I welcome all positive news for the company. So I shouldn't promote this article (Hat tip-kottke.org) which compares the pseudo-science found in the sales pitch for some WF products to creationism and wonders why crunchies get upset about the latter but not the former.
However, I like the article. It's always good to mock oneself.
However, I like the article. It's always good to mock oneself.
Monday, February 24, 2014
Blast from the Past: ACP
The old Agricultural Conservation program was in operation when I joined ASCS. I can remember a trip by a county executive director (Pitt county, NC maybe?) to a sawmill where people were making woven wood garden baskets. This was fall, I think tobacco harvest was well over, so it was work for after harvest time. Anyhow, the CED was signing up a couple landowners/part-time farmers to ACP practices.
ACP was a cost-sharing program, the farmer paying part of the cost of "approved conservation practices", ASCS paying the other part. It was early in the Nixon administration, which didn't believe in the program (thinking it basically enhanced production so should be entirely paid for by the farmer). They ended up in a battle with Congress over the program, resulting in a number of changes. Over the years it was reformed again and finally moved to SCS (which had always fought with ASCS over it).
Why do I babble on about it? This bit from Farm Policy:
ACP was a cost-sharing program, the farmer paying part of the cost of "approved conservation practices", ASCS paying the other part. It was early in the Nixon administration, which didn't believe in the program (thinking it basically enhanced production so should be entirely paid for by the farmer). They ended up in a battle with Congress over the program, resulting in a number of changes. Over the years it was reformed again and finally moved to SCS (which had always fought with ASCS over it).
Why do I babble on about it? This bit from Farm Policy:
"In other policy related news, Mark Peters reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Kevin Hollinger planted radishes and oats last fall in his corn and soybean fields, but he isn’t planning to harvest them. Instead, he is letting the crops die over the winter to improve the soil and keep fertilizer and other nutrients from running into nearby waterways.Winter cover were one set of the conservation practices covered by ACP. I find my memory is foggy here. I don't know whether they were dropped, like lime was, and later reinstated into EQIP and CSP or whether they have always survived.
“‘I could hardly go to town without someone asking: ‘What’s that in your field?’’ said Mr. Hollinger, a fourth-generation farmer.
“Helping to foot the bill for his experiment is a pilot program set to launch fully next month. Farmers in the Ohio River basin are being paid to make changes—from what they plant to how they handle manure—in an effort to minimize runoff that can cause hypoxia, or low oxygen levels, in waterways.”
Sunday, February 23, 2014
Words of Wisdom From a Teenager
“You can create your own miracle,” Shiffrin said when the gold medal was on a sash draped around her neck. “But you do it by never looking past all the little steps along the way.”
From NYTimes
Saturday, February 22, 2014
Understatement of 2008
"The failure of a major investment bank, the forced merger of another,
the largest thrift and insurer teetering, and the failure of Freddie and
Fannie are likely to have a significant impact on the real economy,"
From 2008 transcript of FED meeting.
From 2008 transcript of FED meeting.
Friday, February 21, 2014
The Persistence of Error
Mark Twain had lots of things to say about lies, including a line about a lie getting being half-way round the world while truth was still getting its boots on.
A corollary to that is that error lasts and lasts, while corrections don't. Matt Yglesias and Kevin Drum note an instance: Netflix House of Cards believes the retirement age for social security is 65.
A corollary to that is that error lasts and lasts, while corrections don't. Matt Yglesias and Kevin Drum note an instance: Netflix House of Cards believes the retirement age for social security is 65.
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Bad Mistake: Gates and SOFAs
Reading Mr. Gates' memoir, Duty. He talks about negotiating a status of forces agreement with Iraq and making a very bad mistake: tell the Iraqis to go talk to the other nations with which the US has status of force agreements.
What could go wrong with that? Surely everyone is happy to have US soldiers on their land, aren't they?
No--everyone the Iraqis talked with complained about the behavior of US troops and the aggravations of theirsofas SOFAs.
Just a reminder of how a smart man, surrounded by smart people, who spent his career trying to understand other nations, could lapse into self-satisfied smugness about American virtue.
What could go wrong with that? Surely everyone is happy to have US soldiers on their land, aren't they?
No--everyone the Iraqis talked with complained about the behavior of US troops and the aggravations of their
Just a reminder of how a smart man, surrounded by smart people, who spent his career trying to understand other nations, could lapse into self-satisfied smugness about American virtue.
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Pigford Is Over?
That's the message, without the question mark, of this FSA notice.
I await a scholarly study of the episode.
I await a scholarly study of the episode.
Paperless Government
The Post has an article describing the efforts of the paper industry to lobby against "paperless government", like the requirement that every recipient of government money go to direct deposit. Apparently paper companies are feeling the impact of IT on their bottom line and so argue that every citizen should have the right to get paper instead of electrons.
I've written before I think that part of the sales pitch for the IBM System/36 was the "paperless office". That didn't happen. But a lesson for us: change can come slower than its enthusiasts promise, but it can come.
I've written before I think that part of the sales pitch for the IBM System/36 was the "paperless office". That didn't happen. But a lesson for us: change can come slower than its enthusiasts promise, but it can come.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
LBJ and Vietnam
The NYTimes had an article on LBJ's legacy. The premise of the article is the legacy has been overwhelmed by Vietnam and his other achievements diminished. No doubt that is true. At the risk of being a contrarian, I'd like to argue that his legacy is secure, at least in the long term after I'm dead.
Why? Because I think Vietnam, while destructive of millions of lives and causing much agony, will ultimately appear to be a dead end, while civil rights will never appear so. Already I think I see a general downgrading of the Cold War. I think it's true that most of the US population wasn't born when the Cold War ended, and the number of people for whom it was a live issue (say those born before 1970) is diminishing.
So if the Cold War is fading, so too must Vietnam, which was seen as a battle in the Cold War. As it turned out, I think the current conventional wisdom is there was no convincing rationale for LBJ to expand our involvement. So it's a mistake for LBJ, but we don't mostly remember our presidents for their mistakes, but their accomplishments. And there I think LBJ's will only grow.
Why? Because I think Vietnam, while destructive of millions of lives and causing much agony, will ultimately appear to be a dead end, while civil rights will never appear so. Already I think I see a general downgrading of the Cold War. I think it's true that most of the US population wasn't born when the Cold War ended, and the number of people for whom it was a live issue (say those born before 1970) is diminishing.
So if the Cold War is fading, so too must Vietnam, which was seen as a battle in the Cold War. As it turned out, I think the current conventional wisdom is there was no convincing rationale for LBJ to expand our involvement. So it's a mistake for LBJ, but we don't mostly remember our presidents for their mistakes, but their accomplishments. And there I think LBJ's will only grow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)