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. 

Fraud and Telehealth

 I'm with Doggett on the problem of fraud possibly being enabled by telehealth.

I've been bothered by TV ads I see for various devices which support health--the claim is usually to the effect that the cane or walker or whatever is "free", because Uncle will pay for it.  

Thoughts on Secrecy

 A couple random thoughts.  The former guy and some of his defenders claim he declassified documents even though (presumably) the bureaucratic process to do so was not completed.  For a document to be classified, it has to be marked as "Confidential", "Secret", "Top Secret" or whatever, so to be declassified the marking has to be superseded by another marking: "Declassified" and the date and authority.  (This is my understanding).  So using Trump's theory, you can't prosecute someone for mishandling secrets, such as a Reality Winner without an affidavit from the President asserting he or she has not declassified the document?

While NARA rebutted Trump's claim that Obama had 33 million documents, I'm betting Obama actually has documents/records he shouldn't have, according to some lawyers.  

I go back to Apollo 11, the moon landing, and the other astronauts.  Years after their exploits we learned that astronauts made and kept, or sold, souvenirs of their flights.  Obama is human, so I'm sure he has some personal souvenirs of his time in the office. Perhaps GWB's note to him in the Resolute desk or whatever, something which could qualify as an official document.

87,000 IRS Agents

I've reservations about the Democratic spin on the "87,000 agents" in IRA, as described here, specifically the idea that the new hires are, in part, replacing present employees who will retire over the next 10 years. I haven't seen the IRS report which is the basis for the 87,000 claim, but normally I'd think the baseline for an agency for the next 10 years would include funding for employees at the current level. 

If the IRS has currently 100,000 employes (this Post piece says 80,000) and half will retire over 10 years, that would mean to me that IRS employment would increase by 37,000 because of IRA. 

I've reservations on the CBC's estimates of their added collections as well.  I bet the first thing the Republicans do when they gain the House, Senate, or Presidency is to use that leverage to negotiate a cut in IRS employment.  (Of course, CBC can't be that cynical.)