More on Unemployment Insurance Systems

 I noted the use of COBOL in state unemployment insurance systems. 

This GovExec article describes what the Biden administration is doing.  I wish them luck, and persistence.

The Extended Mind

 The Extended Mind is an ambitious book, one which tries to link together a lot of science and social science research into many subjects.  Part of the discussion is the way in which our body affects our mind and brain; if we sense, gesture, or move it impacts the working of our brains in specific areas and ways. Space also impacts: are we in natural surroundings or built ones, can we use space to extend our memory (the "memory palace" method).  Finally how do groups (experts, peers, diverse groups) affect us.  The thrust of the discussion is how we can use the information/research to improve our thinking and effectiveness.

I found myself skimming. One of the Amazon reviews complains about the author's narration in the audible book being monotonal; there's something of a monotone about her writing as well (it would have been improved by following her own advice--adding graphics to the book, particularly for the "conclusions"). It would have been more useful if I were younger.   I did skim all the way through, and actually I found the last chapter ("thinking with groups") the most interesting, likely not in the way she intended.

As I read, two phenomena came to mind: the death of the concertgoers in Houston and Trump's rallies. She writes about how groups, particularly students or coworkers, can be more effective, but some factors are common: a common focus (speaker, performer) and common engagement.  Both were likely present in Houston and in Trump's rallies. I suspect I'm not too different from many liberals in dismissing the rallies in the past. But after reading the chapter I'm reconsidering, particularly in the light of Houston. Just because I'm proudly individualistic (I write with tongue in cheek) doesn't mean that others are. 

Whither Bipartisanship?

 Nancy Pelosi led a delegation of Congressional Democrats to the climate change conference in the UK. 

I'm old enough to remember when we used to have bipartisan representation during many major international efforts.  I don't know when that stopped.

NIMBY and Racism

 Recent articles on how industrial areas, particularly those with undesirable side effects such as air or water pollution from chemicals or what we used to call "junkyards", are located in or near black areas.  The usual theory is the choice of the site was racist in a sort of generic way.  

I used to try to slow my employees down when they tried to explain something to me--usually I wanted a step by step approach to get things clear in my mind.  That temperament is perhaps one reason I resist the implied explanation. 

I can imagine a cascade of NIMBYism that produces the end result without anyone involved in the decision making process being consciously racist.  Both a reaction against a proposed siting decision by rich and powerful neighbors, or the anticipation of trouble by those making the decision could play a part, as could a higher cost of land.  That's even assuming there was a decision point, rather than a more unplanned evolution of land use.

Should Agency HQ's be in DC?

 One argument against the Trump administration's moves of BLM and the USDA agencies out of DC was the need to work closely with the rest of the administration and Congress.

There's a hint in this discussion of CDC director Walensky (the HQ is in Atlanta but she seems to be working from MA?) that CDC is being hurt by the location.

Participatory Budgeting

 Apparently the recent elections authorized something called "participatory budgeting" in Boston (the link seems to say it's more of an exploration than a cut and dried deal). First I'd heard of it, although there's an organization devoted to promoting it.

Without knowing anything about it I don't like it.  I don't get many comments on this blog, but the longest exchange I had with anyone was on this issue, although neither the proponent nor I called it that.  I think my resistance is based on inheriting some "Progressive" or "goo-goo" ideas--the concept that professionals in management know better than mere citizens about what is needed and how to do it.  (I wrote the preceding sentence with tongue-in-cheek, and am only half serious.) 

I may look at it more seriously now, or I may get lazy and pass. 

Youngkin in Oval in 2025?

 Since McAuliffe lost in VA on Tuesday, attention turns to the victor; Mr. Youngkin. He's youngish (56) and obviously ambitious, so where does he go.  Virginia governors are term-limited, so in 2025 he'll be looking for a new job. Senator Kaine presumably will run for reelection in 2024, so one possibility is to run for that seat. 

Youngkin seems to combine some assets: a pleasing persona, enough political ability to thread the needle between Trump and Virginia moderates, a resume combining achievements in finance and in religion, plus the requisite family (four children).

There's discussion today of whether his campaign sets a pattern for the Republicans in the future.  The attack on CRT and support of charter schools is a tie to the right, while otherwise he seems to have a more conventional Republican platform.  So I think the test will be whether he can navigate the politics of the next two years, and lead the Republicans to a takeover of the Senate and increased margin in the House of Delegates in 2023.  If that happens, he'd make a good dark horse candidate.  

The "Essential America"

 Children believe in essentialism. So did ancient Greeks, apparently, according to the wikipedia article.  I don't.

Is "America" essentially a racist country, a white-dominated country, a city on the hill, a light unto the world, an imperial hegemon, a pillar of human rights?  My answer is some of all of the above, more so at different times in history and less so at other times, in some places and at some times.

In other words, it's complicated.

The Nose of the Camel and Government Programs

 This Politico piece traces the history of the pension program for Civil War veterans (Union army) from very limited coverage to close to universal, ending with its last payment in 2020 to a widow. It argues that because the vets developed an effective lobby organization (Grand Army of the Republic) they were able to expand the program over the years.  It goes on to cite the 20th century's Social Security and Medicare programs as similar cases where a program limited initially was expanded subsequently. All of this is in service to an argument that possibly the programs included in Biden's "Build Back Better" might have a similar destiny.

I don't quarrel with the writer's logic and hope for the expansion of BBB programs.  I do offer the instance of USDA farm programs as another instance of the expansion of government programs, an instance which is even more noteworthy than his examples.

In the years since the Agricultural Adjustment Act was passed, programs have expanded to cover not only seven or eight field crops, but oilseeds, fruits and vegetables, specialty crops, aquaculture, apiculture, etc.  The only crops whose programs have been reduced as of now are tobacco, peanuts, and naval stores.

Does College Broaden One?

I read this the other day:

A university is a place where minds should be opened, not closed; where perspectives should be broadened, not narrowed; where biases should be challenged, not confirmed. It would appear that many of our universities are failing at this critically important role.

It started me thinking.  When I went to college that was true.  But then I was coming from a mostly rural area and background, living in a time when my knowledge of the world was mostly limited to reading magazines and the Binghamton Press newspaper, short news broadcasts on NBC, and the books available at home and in the school library..  So encountering the variety of people and courses at college was definitely broadening, particularly socially, since I was already leaning liberal and agnostic.  College opened a world of choices to me, or at least made more real the choices I had vague glimpses of when in high school.

Would that be true today? I don't think so, at least for me.  If I were growing up today, I'd have had access through the internet to more information than all of my professors had in 1959, not to mention movies, videos, social media, porn, from across the  world.  If I wished, which I think I would have, I could have explored a multitude of careers and livestyles in great detail.

The "university" by its name has always been a place to encounter the universe of knowledge, but it no longer has a monopoly; it has to share its special position with the web. I think the change must affect the role of college as a rite of passage, marking a big change in one's life, and therefore collegiate culture. How can college be a liberating, a broadening experience when the incoming student has already experienced the variety of social media?  It can't, and students, at least enough students to make a fuss, want something different.

When I went to college activists were still protesting against "in loco parentis" rules, curfews, etc.,  We thought we were adults, and wanted recognition accordingly, using that as fuel for our rebellion against our elders. We wanted college to be a place of freedom.  These days the activists, both liberal and conservative, want school to be a refuge, a safe place for their identities.