The downside of tolerence

"ACORN had been given a compelling incentive, as CRA allowed the organizations to collect a fee from the banks for their services in marketing the loans. The Senate Banking Committee had estimated that, as a result of CRA, $9.5 billion had gone to pay for services and salaries of the organizers."
This from a review of the history of the sub prime disaster. It is a small part but nonetheless surprisingly accepted. This may well be what these candidates mean by spreading the wealth.
Tolerance has become indifference. This huge scandal has blended in with all the discrepancies, outrages and disasters that the democracy metabolizes in its days and weeks. That any culture can blink at such behavior, behavior that strikes at its roots, is compelling evidence for its decline. This bizarre manipulation of finances, demographics and now voting--a huge sweeping effort at social restructuring conjoined with considerable personal gain--is unpleasant only, like bad weather, as people submissively adjust their lives in their passionless economic worlds. We shrug these events off like minor wounds and slog on. At its heart this indifference comes from despair, the despair of the soldier in the trench who knows the decisions that will decide his life have slipped beyond his control and he must survive within the limits applied to him from above, by his superiors. This country has always had a defiant independent quality in its genes; that may be thinned out.

spreading the wealth

The notion of my giving my money to someone else is indeed neighborly and kind should I do it. But to have a third person give my money to someone else is neither. It certainly is no reflection on me. And, of course, it is taken forcibly from me, most likely by the same people who thought they would benefit from the idea in the first place. If the government becomes a benevolent power in our lives, it will be the first time ever. Ask Iraq. Ask New Orleans. Ask the pensioner with the ever changing social security goalposts. Even the church has a spotty record. And the government is a notoriously inefficient and dishonest middleman. This enthusiasm is just beyond me.
The only good thing about this election is it will be soon over.

the series and life's lottery

Watched the game last night 'til the 6th. I was astounded to hear the umpires' union had negotiated a deal that forbids umpires from working consecutive series. Regardless of how good an umpire is, he cannot be brought back for the series next year. These men are clearly Obama voters. Spreading the wealth. Not a surprise the umpiring has been the story of the series for the first time ever. There is a terrible, irrational quality in the thinking of these people; they believe in "life's lottery". It implies that all life is random; places, people and events can be exchanged. Likely this comes from reading a course syllabus on introductory science. Had they read a bit further they would start talking about Heisenberg. Certainly there are biases in life. There is a wonderful line about George Bush "who was born on third base and thought he hit a triple." But distinctions among people are more than silly vanities. Pujols has certain qualities of vision, coordination and power that differentiate him from me. That differentiate him from the leadoff hitter and the pitcher, too. I would never be able to compete with Jorden or Bettis or Crosby, regardless of my work ethic. Nor could I displace Steven Hawking, or even hold his attention for a minute. While I recognize these biases I do not recognize them as unfair. I would love to be a great athlete with lots of money and adoring fans but I do not feel that the fact that I am not is unfair. Nor do I think wealth is unfair. Wealth is one of the truly fair distinctions in life: somebody earned it. Crosby, Jorden, Sandy Koufax-none of those guys earned their distinctions although they certainly worked harder than any politician to develop them. (Larry Bird wasn't his high school team's best player, Jean Auel was not her writing group's best writer nor was Turow).
One of the reasons we watch the game is to see the distinctions play out. Giving a lousy umpire his chance is unfair, unfair to the better umpire who is being passed over, unfair to the hitter and the pitcher who have to accommodate to his erratic calls, unfair to the third baseman who must swallow the injustice, unfair to the fan who must put the game in the context of his errors and unfair to the game which makes demands on everyone else.
There is no error for the umpire.

the series and life's lottery

Watched the game last night 'til the 6th. I was astounded to hear the umpires' union had negotiated a deal that forbids umpires from working consecutive series. Regardless of how good an umpire is, he cannot be brought back for the series next year.

These men are clearly Obama voters. Spreading the wealth. Not a surprise the umpiring has been the story of the series for the first time ever. There is a terrible, irrational quality in the thinking of these people; they believe in "life's lottery". It implies that all life is random; places, people and events can be exchanged. Likely this comes from reading a course syllabus on introductory science. Had they read a bit further they would start talking about Heisenberg.

Certainly there are biases in life. There is a wonderful line about George Bush "who was born on third base and thought he hit a triple." But distinctions among people are harder to assess than that. Pujols has certain qualities of vision, coordination and power that differentiate him from me; that differentiate him from the leadoff hitter and the pitcher, too. I would never be able to compete with Jorden or Bettis or Crosby, regardless of my work ethic. Nor could I displace Steven Hawkings, or even hold his attention for a minute.

While I recognize these biases I do not recognize them as unfair. I would love to be a great athlete with lots of money and adoring fans but I do not feel that the fact that I am not is unfair. Nor do I think wealth is unfair. Wealth is one of the truly fair distinctions, differences, in life; somebody earned it. Crosby, Jordan, Sandy Koufax-none of those guys earned their distinctions although they certainly worked harder than any politician to develop them. (Remember, Larry Bird wasn't his high school team's best player, Jean Auel was not her writing group's best writer nor was Turow). Giving a lousy umpire his chance is unfair, unfair to the better umpire who is being passed over, unfair to the hitter and the pitcher who have to accommodate to his erratic calls, unfair to the third baseman who must tolerate his injustices, unfair to the fan who must put the game in the context of his errors and unfair to the game which makes demands on everyone else.

There is no error for the umpire.

representantion without taxation is tyranny

In 2006:
1. About 300 million citizens in the U.S.
2. 136 million tax returns
3. 93 million returns paid taxes.
4. Gov't revenues were 2.57 trillion dollars, 70% from individuals.
5. 1% of taxpayers paid 39.9% of the individual taxes (vs. 34.4% in 2003.)
6. The top 5% paid 60.1% of the individual taxes (vs. 54.4% in 2003.)
7. Top 10% paid 70.8% (vs. 65.8% in 2003.)
8. The top 25% paid 86.3% (vs. 83.9% in 2003.)
9. Top 50% paid 97% (vs. 96.5% in 2003.)
10.The bottom 50% of taxpayers, TAXPAYERS, paid 3% (vs. 3.5% in 2003.)
11.This election, 30% of voters will not pay any federal income tax this year.

Palin and the election

Palin was in town last night. I'm beginning to feel some real sympathy for her. This woman is not a professional politician. She ended up governor of a big state by a series of circumstances and, by all accounts, is an attractive and compelling woman. Is she an expert on the Middle East? No. Is Biden? No. Is she as goofy as Biden? No. Is Barney Frank a guy you would put in charge of anything? No, not even a male prostitution ring. But I think the savagery she has inspired means something: I think people I dislike are afraid of her and that interests me. And they--that is the republicans, the democrats and the press--have been cruel to her. The republicans have thrown her to the wolves because it doesn't matter; she attracts a voter she will not alienate under any circumstances. The democrats hate her because she makes women and abortion complicated, and the press hates her because the democrats do and she is popular with a group they disdain. That stunt on CNN was unforgivable. The cruelty is unforgivable. It is beyond anything I imagined people in the public space would do.
That said, I really dislike the two presidential candidates and hope that whoever wins has enough judgment and humility to pick good advisers and listen to them. This period of time is too important to us to have such uncertainty in our leaders (although I must admit Obama acts the part). At any rate, I am done with this election; I'm voting for Palin. I know she won't win but she needs a friend.

social security day

I have met a milestone: I have signed up for Social Security. This has been troubling. First, I can not believe I am this old. This is clearly an emotional and not a reasonable conclusion. After all, a woman younger than I -I knew her as a child - has Alzheimer's. But there is something about this age that feels a bit like turning the third corner of the 400; there is a finishing feeling. Many people I know think that people are in much better health than people used to be and generally I think that is true. But illness is more than a weight that grows like a wart with age, it is a sniper in the trees. I've never thought much about my health or my limits until just recently but milestones are reminders. For some they become millstones. On the other hand, I bought some o.r. shoes two years ago and thought wistfully at the time they would be my last. Now, with this economy and the idiots running for office I have decided to buy another pair.
The other discomfort was the office itself. My experiences with these bureaucracies are usually bad. From the inevitable surly cop to the stunningly disinterested postal worker, the professional government employee always meets my low expectation. And it started badly; my first effort to register--after taking time from work with great effort--was yesterday. Columbus Day. Of course they were closed and I walked away cursing that most of the government wanted to abolish the day--or at least the name--anyway. On my second try every preconception I had was initially confirmed. The room was filled with tough looking, badly dressed people. There was a lot of loud talk and some clearly undiagnosed problems loosed on an unsuspecting world. On the other hand they were uniformly polite, concerned and social. The employees were helpful to everyone; even with the obvious lunatics late in the day they were all smiling and good natured. I was sorry to have prejudged them all, clients and employees, so harshly.

The Change

So much is going on.Everyone should keep journals. These times are astonishing in their speed and change. Obama looks like a blowout. I spoke to a very conservative woman last weekend who hates Obama and she said she hoped the election would be decisive. No more of these bitter, hard fought contest with courts and challenges and outrage. I think it is a wise view. Nixon was beaten by Kennedy by gross fraud in Chicago and never considered fighting the results because of the pain it would cause the country. I think the same now. But this is going to be destructive. Obama is coming to power with a groundswell of uncertainty of the value of freedom, uncertainty that we can run our own lives and should be stuck with the results. It is a depressing view--hardly new and shopworn with failure throughout history--but seems popular enough to carry the day and decade. It is even accepted by the capitalist who fears a real social collapse without it. But it will be hard. A class of bureaucrat/managers will develop to guide the world and there will be no place to hide from their benevolence. Production will certainly decline for the more homogeneous mean and, lurking in the background, will be that gnawing threat that there are limits to growth, that innovation may not be forthcoming under such a benighted and preoccupied system and that serious sacrifices must be made by some, likely the very individuals who should step foreward. And in the face of such problems flies the overt failure of the government leaders to exhibit any competence at all in this crisis. "No one knows what to do" will echo in our minds for years. How can we possibly look to the government system--however changed--when the leaders of the new system are the same pilots that caused the initial wreck? Well, there are no guillotines, no firing squads, no racks. And we are resilient. Even in an economic revolution run by half baked politicians avowing discredited theories, hard work always survives--if it doesn't win.