Election hangovers, global warming, death panels, and other matters

Mail 750 Sunday, November 11, 2012

clip_image002

our plan

Dear Dr. Pournelle:

Despair is a sin. When does the constant beating of one’s head against a brick wall become a sin?

Our plan for the foreseeable future is not much of a plan and may even be despicable, but it has the virtue of stopping the pain. For years my wife and I have met the requirements to draw a "disability" check. Instead we have worked longer, harder and more diligently to maintain the lifestyle we established with relative ease in the 1980s. No more.

We are both retiring and applying for disability now. We will put our house on the market, such as it is. It probably doesn’t surprise you that our mortgage is considerably less than the market value of the property. As soon as we close on the house, we will start to travel this still-beautiful land, going where we choose, when we choose.

Our only child has special needs and will never have children of his own. There is absolutely no reason for us to continue working as we have. We have accomplished most that we set out to do and have no reason to wish to leave anything behind to be looted. If this be sin, count us among the damned.

Please do not use my name or email address, but you may sign me,

Blowin’ in the Wind

Be careful of inflation.

clip_image002[1]

Four More Years

Dr. Pournelle:

The economy is already tanking.

I had a decent job in 2008. A month after Obama was inaugurated I lost that job and didn’t see another for two years.

Now I’m in the worst job I’ve had in thirty years. I just found out that we are going to have a six days of unpaid "vacation" between Thanksgiving and New Years, twice what we had last year. I would not at all be surprised if they made us part-time in order to avoid Obamacare.

Obama seems to suffer from the same sort of obsession with gigantism that afflicted Stalin. Apparently the only jobs of which he’s aware are with G.E., G.M., or government. Everyone else is utterly invisible to him, and in fact don’t matter at all. As far as he’s concerned, we could, in the words of a once famous low grade moron, "Die quickly".

During the run-up to the Obamacare vote, I told my mother, a former AFSCME member, "We’ve long since passed the ‘It’s a bad idea’ stage. We’re now at ‘It’s mathematically impossible." Her reply? "They’ll just print more money." To this I responded, "You’re old enough to remember what happened when the Germans tried that." What’s going to be worse, Obama or what comes along to "fix" Obama? President for Life Buchanan? Obama’s setting himself up to be Salvador Allende. Who’s in the wings waiting to play the role of Augusto Pinochet?

Chris Morton

Beware of inflation.

= = =

Inflation

Please do not publish my name.

> That is the first lesson: prepare for inflation.

And how does one do that in 2012? Traditionally, defense against inflation consists of cost-of-living raises, investment in precious metals (gold, silver), investment in manufacturing commodities (e.g. copper), buying land, and purchasing hard consumer goods (e.g., toilet paper) as far ahead as possible and storing them.

Cost-of-living raises are likely to be minimal in the private sector given the weak economy. Purchasing gold and silver is very easy through ETF’s, but I strongly suspect that at some point the federal government will put a steep tax on capital gains earned through sales of precious metals. They will sell it to voters as a form of the "rich" hoarding capital that is needed by the masses; after all, if you can afford to buy gold ETFs, you are clearly affluent.

Buying land may make sense, but if you live in an expensive region of the country, it may not be viable even for the middle class.

Storing consumer goods has limits, and makes more sense in a period of serious hyperinflation. It’s particularly difficult if you live in an apartment or condo rather than a house.

Many Americans have been frugal savers for decades and have a great deal to protect, and they do not have time to go back and replace their savings with new earnings if they are lost due to inflation. And a significant proportion of that savings is in 401k and IRA accounts with legal limits on the types of investments that can be made in them.

I would welcome your thoughts.

Please do not publish my name.

C

We will be discussing this in the next few weeks. It is a very serious question.

clip_image002[2]

"Fallen Angels": Science or Fiction

Throw another log on the fire…

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/09/peat_ice_age_coming_only_co2_can_save_us/

Robert Forrest

Yours is one of many pointing to that article. We don’t know what halts Ice Ages; we do know that there was a great deal of ice and much lower seas during much of pre-history of mankind, and that the ice sheets have come and gone more than once.

We also know that it was warmer in the Viking age than it is now. We know that the seas have been rising at about a foot a century for at least 300 years, and we are fairly certain that this rate goes back a very long time (you can see the ruins of coastal cities in the Mediterranean, for example).

The problem with the cult of Global Warming is that we aren’t studying what is really happening.

Swedish boffins: An ICE AGE is coming, only CO2 can save us! FALLEN ANGELS

Jerry

What a lovely headline. Swedish boffins: An ICE AGE is coming, only CO2 can save us. Have a look:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/09/peat_ice_age_coming_only_co2_can_save_us/print.html

“A group of Swedish scientists at the University of Gothenburg have published a paper in which they argue that spreading peatlands are inexorably driving planet Earth into its next ice age, and the only thing holding back catastrophe is humanity’s hotly debated atmospheric carbon emissions. "We are probably entering a new ice age right now. However, we’re not noticing it due to the effects of carbon dioxide," says Professor of Physical Geography Lars Franzén, from the Department of Earth Sciences at Gothenburg uni.”

Fallen Angels seem to be coming home to roost. I guess it’s time for me to dust off my old copy.

Ed

clip_image003

clip_image003[1]

End-of-life medical care

Mr. Pournelle;

Your musings regarding "death panels" reminded me of a set of questions Senator Paul Wellstone used to recommend:

Who profits?

Who pays?

Who decides?

I thought they were good questions then, and they’re good questions in your comments. I agree that end-of-life medical care needs to be brought under control, and also that this is going to be emotionally, ethically, and politically hard to do. But it needs to happen; seems to me our medical technology is good enough to keep people "alive" for a very long time, while not being good enough to do any real healing at that point.

Allan E. Johnson

clip_image002[3]

Death Panels

Dear Dr Pournelle,

Your comments on the last two years of (expensive) life, and voting on treatment with Death Panels, reminded me of the controversies over here in England over the Liverpool Care Pathway. In essence a panel of doctors decide that a patient is dying and stop almost all treatment (I think pain medication is still continued). This is certainly cheaper, and arguably retains some dignity for the patient. The controversy arises from the lack of consent, in some cases, and apparently some patients dying of thirst after artificial hydration being stopped.

I think that this type of regime is almost inevitable when health care is universally available, but resources are limited. I expect that Obamacare will bring a variant of LCP to the US.

Regards,

Dave Checkley

clip_image002[4]

Sobering

Jerry

I happened upon a teacher’s blog. She was going to vote Obama. When talking with people who were going to vote Republican, she thought (but did not say out loud) “You want to repeal the programs we fought to get enacted.” That, and the infamous 47% voting their pocketbooks, probably explains the results.

Your comments on end of life care remind me of a couple of events that hang in my memory. The first was when I was talking with an old man who described his Parkinson’s disease as “Death on the Installment Plan” (these days I have to explain to many what an installment plan was). This old man, whose quality of life (QOL in current medical jargon) was pretty low, said this about just letting go: “I don’t want to die.”

The other event came when I was asked to determine the competency of a man with a mouthful of tubes and respirator hoses. Should they turn off his breathing machine? His wife was convinced that he was suffering and would welcome death. The doctors agreed. The man had never had a mental illness, but they needed a shrink to pronounce on his competence. So, remembering the first event, I gathered up all my fancy expertise, leaned over and asked the man, “Do you want to die?” He shook his head NO, a look like terror on his face. The wife changed her mind instantly and rushed to his side.

I think that end-of-life issues are complicated. I know some men who would welcome death to get away from their wives. I knew a woman who died happy because her death had shown up some doctors who believed she had psychosomatic paralysis.

The answer is 42.

Ed

clip_image003[2]

Astroboffins spot smiley face on Mercury

Jerry

Have you seen the smiley face on Mercury?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/09/smiley_face_on_mercury/print.html

Ah, those lads and lasses at NASA . . .

Ed

clip_image002[5]

Financial cliff

Dr. Pournelle –

It appears to me that the electorate has, by re-electing the President, told us that they want government spending to continue. At the same time, by leaving control of the House with Republicans, they have told us that they want the spending to be covered by revenues, not by borrowing. And finally, by leaving the Senate in Democrat hands, they have told us that they believe that letting the Bush tax cuts expire is the way to pay, not cutting rates in anticipation that it would increase revenue.

So I say, make a deal. The Bush tax rates expire, the automatic spending cuts do NOT go into effect, and we’ll see what happens.

Meanwhile, we need to start calling the new tax rates "the Obama Tax Rates" and the increasing deficit "the Obama Gap."

I understand that the more acceptable deal, for some, might be to trade the Bush rates for the cuts, i.e., just go over the cliff. That would be my second choice.

Harmon Dow

Chicago, but my house is red.

clip_image002[6]

Spengler > If You Believe in Staples, Clap Your Hands

Jerry

Spengler has some comments on the current business scene:

http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2012/11/07/if-you-believe-in-staples-clap-your-hands/?singlepage=true

“The last wave of entrepreneurship is long since gone, and there is nothing in the pipeline to replace it. The startup sector of the U.S. economy is dead in the water. In past recoveries, firms with 500 to 1,000 employees were the biggest job creators, as the successful few became big companies. This time around, firms of this size lost the most jobs. Venture capital is doing terribly. Three-quarters of venture capital firms lost money during the past decade, and the sector performed well below publicly traded indices. Once the poster-child for edgy entrepreneurship, Apple has transmogrified into a would-be monopoly that relies on its legal team more than its engineers to suppress prospective competitors. That’s distasteful, considering that Steve Jobs started out by stealing the idea for GUI from Xerox.”

We need a German Miracle. Won’t get one with this President.

Ed

And by the time his term is over, much will be irreversible. Depend on that. Recovery is possible, but it will not be quick. We had the ‘quick’ choice until this election. It’s gone now. And entitlements will continue, and the bunny inspectors will get raises. It is time for the clever to be clever.

clip_image003[3]

"Free Stuff" and the Election

Mr. Pournelle:

Hal makes interesting points regarding "Free Stuff." As a liberal, I think as a country we need to start paying the bills; and I expect that would mean my taxes would rise. I accept that. I would also support spending cuts, if they offend Democrats and Republicans equally; I don’t think either party can play "let’s cut your priorities, but ours are all sacrosanct." For one specific, I am now receiving Social Security, but would support bringing expenditures on that program down; although I would *not* support "reforms" which appear to be intended to eliminate Social Security by attrition. As a liberal, I have written, and will write, to my congresscritters in such terms.

I am glad that Mr. Boehner has been ready to distance himself from Grover Norquist’s theories far enough to accept the notion that increased revenues could be useful. However, I don’t have any confidence that tax cuts can achieve this, and, regarding tax reform, I’d have to see the details. The difference between reform and pandering isn’t always obvious.

Regarding taxes: while I concede that, at some point on the Bell Curve, increased taxes bring decreased revenue, I think it’s equally obvious that at some point decreased taxes no longer stimulate growth. The question would be: where are we on the curve? I tend not to trust economic theories or predictions much, but it seems to me that our tax structures under Presidents Reagan and Clinton worked pretty well. For that matter, Eisenhower-era tax rates didn’t eviscerate growth, though both Republicans and Democrats would probably have cat-fits if anyone proposed such rates now. Before continuing the Bush-era tax cuts, I’d like to see some evidence they gave us a stronger economy. I have no useful comment on the stimulus approach to recession — it doesn’t seem to me that anyone really *knows* how to head off a depression, so I don’t see the point in second-guessing.

If neither party can muster enough integrity to negotiate a "grand bargain" on taxes and spending, then maybe the so-called "fiscal cliff" (even with its attendant shocks) will be the best we can do. It’s something like using a machete to prune the tea roses, but at least it would be something of a reset button.

Allan E. Johnson

clip_image002[7]

Hal’ observations re: "Free stuff" and the election

"Even if one disagrees with him on policy, Mr. Obama has always recognized that optimism sells. Just as Mr. Reagan did. The substance may be different, but the more Reaganesque candidate in presentation won last night. And that too is ironic."

Mr. Reagan did not personally demonize his opponent, and did not run a nasty, divisive campaign. While I agree in general with many of the points that Hal made, I find it appalling to characterize President Obama as in any way “Reaganesque”.

Don Hallenbeck

clip_image002[8]

Re: Hal’s comments

With respect, Hal’s comments are way off base. In the midst of a poor economy, Hal wants to blame Republicans on the one hand for spreading "fear" and on the other for not having "real world concerns" and then claim they’re also responsible for the "free stuff" idea. But those ideas are internally inconsistent. In truth, Republicans ARE talking about real world concerns in terms of our debt and the unemployment crisis, and a proper understanding of that does generate fear about our current trajectory with the implication that there can be no more free stuff. To wave that away as Obama did was not being "positive", it was indulging in fantasy, the fantasy that Medicare is Strengthened even while paying for Obamacare and that somehow he’ll cut the deficit by taxing the rich while "investing" more on education and green energy and that there will be no tax increases on the middle class, yada yada yada. Romney was positive in that he thought he could confront and succeed at these challenges; Obama pretended they were never there. (As for the allusion to Mr. Norquist, I have no idea what Hal’s point is supposed to be. The whole point of the government interference is that it is driven by political incentives, not market supply and demand. And nothing I’ve seen about tax cuts seem even remotely connected with making the cost of government services "low low low". Baffled by this statement.)

Jason Fletcher

clip_image003[4]

Niven & Benford at Google.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-PF32jdqkw>

Roland Dobbins

clip_image002[9]

The stupidity, corruption, and freak of Pasok, the most infamous socialistic mafia on Earth, are out of this world! Pasok mafiosi are the freaks that initiated the impunity and immunity of Graecokleptocrats, the Siemens scandal, the military bribes, myriad kickbacks, and the fiasco of October 18, 2010, which destroyed my life. Pasok freaks stole my life. Pasok declared a war against me, but the whole world is watching this Armageddon. Many Pasok politicians, such as Akis Tsochatzopoulos, Yannos Papantoniou, Tasos Mantelis, Christos Verelis, and Mariliza Xenoyiannakopoulou, are now investigated by the Financial Crimes Squad (SDOE).

The Greek government is the #1 enemy of the Greek people, a den of thieves, a source of myriad stupid things, a grand sink of bribes and kickbacks, the mother of all bureaucracies, a sender of Trojan Horses, a master of hoodwinks and smokescreens, a gang of freaks, a madhouse, a rot of rabble-rousers, a clan of kleptocrats. http://venitism.blogspot.com

The government of Greece in 2010 was so stupid that it hoodwinked all media that I conspired to trigger a war between Greece and Turkey and blame Mariliza Xenogiannakopoulou, Alternate Minister of Foreign Affairs of Greece, for it! Accusing dissident bloggers of treason, the Greek government manufactured a blood libel in cyberspace, which in turn incites hatred. The government of Greece gave my head on plate to Erdogan. Brutal Graecokleptocrats have destroyed my life. My life is stolen. Now I demand my life back!

In October of 2010, an unknown American, member of Crystal Clear Forum, an American Yahoo Group, used as pseudonym the name of Mariliza Xenogiannakopoulou, Alternate Minister of Foreign Affairs of Greece, to post a single message about Turkey. The unknown American did not violate any law because, according to the Supreme Court of USA, anybody can use any pseudonym or pen name. For example, thousands of people use Obama’s name as a pseudonym. It’s considered an honor, not a forgery. http://venitism.blogspot.com

Only spoofing is forgery. The unknown American would have used spoofing if she used Xenogiannakopoulou’s email which is marilxen@gmail.com. Instead she used mariliza.xenogiannakopoulou@yahoo.com which is not Xenogiannakopoulou’s email. The unknown American posted on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crystalclearforum with her pseudonym using a kind of literature called Lyric Essay, which uses emotion and color to enlighten a message.

A malevolent blogbuster misinformed Xenogiannakopoulou that the culprit was I, Basil Venitis, just because my name was mentioned in the post! As a result of this misinformation, on October 18, 2010, a gang of six brutal cybercops of the violent Greek Cyber Crime Unit (CCU) broke into my home in Athens and into my college office, and stole my computers, software, files, documents, and personal data. http://venitism.blogspot.com

The cybercops locked me in jail for a night, they humiliated me with handcuffs, fingerprints, mug shots, and lies, leaked false information to the media parrots, and the Greek government initiated sham court proceedings for a stack of stupid freakish charges, including forgery and treason! There was neither pillow nor toilet facility in my jail cell. I had to urinate in a bottle! I, a 67 year old with high blood pressure, was not allowed to keep my hypertension pills with me. There was neither toilet paper nor soap in the whole CCU jail facility.

As a result of the huge bad publicity in all media, I resigned from my job without any kind of compensation. I had to protect my employer from any spillovers of government stupidity. The government of Greece misinformed all TV stations, radio stations, newspapers, and blogs with stupid freakish stories about me, presenting me as a traitor and warmonger!

But that’s not the end of the story. Xenogiannakopoulou never shows up in court. My nerves are broken by infinite deferments of my court trial! The judge always postpones the trial ad infinitum. Meanwhile, I always have to show up and waste the whole day waiting as there is no definite timing for the hearing, but only a day. I and my lawyer have to be in the courtroom the whole day until the judge calls my name. Then the judge postpones the trial for another day of harassment, and so it goes. This has happened six times so far! This is a real Greek tragedy! Justice delayed is no justice, justice perpetuated is hell. This amounts to routine summary punishment of the presumed innocent.

Greece, the most corrupt country in Occident, has become a kangaroo valley, violating basic human rights and Article 2 of the Lisbon Treaty, but nobody gives a damn. I cannot understand why the European Commission tolerates political persecution and freakish Kangaroo Justice within the borders of the European Union and cannot refer the Greek government to the Court of Justice of the European Union. I cannot understand why the European Commission cannot protect Greeks from appalling violations of Article 2 of the Lisbon Treaty by the Greek government. If the European Union cannot protect Greeks from the repressive Greek government, who will?

The government of Greece uses charge stacking to persecute dissident bloggers. Charge stacking is the ability to charge a large number of overlapping crimes for a single course of conduct. Combining crimes enables prosecutors to get convictions in cases where there is no misconduct at all. By stacking enough charges, including treason, prosecutors jack up the threat value of a trial against a dissident blogger, even if the government’s case is very weak. Charge stacking is terror. Disgusting governments cannot terrorize their people.

Persecuting dissident bloggers, the government of Greece violates Article 2 of the Lisbon Treaty, which states the European Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, nondiscrimination, tolerance, and justice prevail.

Greece violates Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

Greece violates Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which states that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. http://venitism.blogspot.com

Greece violates Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which states that every citizen has the right to freedom of expression. This right includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected. http://venitism.blogspot.com

JAILBIRD FOR A NIGHT

By Basil Venitis

Big brother checks the internet

For things you criticize

To shut your mouth on the net

To shut your mind on the sky.

Cops busted my home

And stole my computer

Hard disk on their comb

blogger on their mooter.

They threw me in jail

For speaking my mind

My words are out of jail

Revolting in a kind.

This jail is awful

Without pillow alone

Urinating in a bottle

And the girl next cell begins to moan.

Screaming in the dark of jail

Guards pretending they are deaf

She is a girl, she is frail

She is missing her Jeff.

I can smile at the old days,

I was a handsome professor then.

Those were real happy days

Happy memory lives again.

Lesmiserables in jail

Kleptocrats out of jail

This is hell on Earth

It’s shame and pain.

Time for a real revolt

To bring a real change

To bring the looting to a halt

Kleptocrats should not escape.

Kleptocrats must be laughing

Premier must be happy,

This is stupid and disgusting,

Government has a party.

Harmglads sleeping before dawn

Silence cut with a cry

Jailbird could be reborn

Coming back to a happy life.

My memory leads me

Finding strength within

People really love me

A new life should begin.

Waiting for the sunrise

Thinking of a new life

I mustn’t give in

A new day will begin.

clip_image002[10]

clip_image005

clip_image002[11]

Inflation for high schoolers

View 750 Sunday, November 11, 2012

VETERANS DAY

clip_image001

clip_image003

Given the results of the election, continued inflation is inevitable, increased inflation is highly probable, and hyperinflation becomes more likely. There are some principles and preparations that must be studied and learned. We will be looking at those in future. Surviving inflation requires a different approach from surviving war or natural disaster, but there are some common measures.

In addition, there will be inflations of taxes. At first these will fall only on the very wealthy, but since those cannot raise the needed revenues to pay for entitlements there will be desperate searches for new revenue. Inflation is not an option for state and local governments, so you may expect a multiplication of taxes and fees. Traditionally the “sin” taxes – tobacco, marijuana, alcohol – will be raised. That will result in more black market competition with the tax collectors, which will lead to greater need for “law enforcement” – including tax collectors and revenuers.

The pressure to raise federal taxed in order to “fight the deficit” will be high, but the federal government does have the inflation option; state and local governments can’t inflate the currency, but they can try to get in on the federal government’s printing press money by devising more and more schemes to federalize state, county, and local “infrastructure” expenses.

We will need to look at ways to avoid – not evade – rising state and local taxes another time. The obvious way is to migrate to states that are more devoted to frugality than entitlement benefits, but do not underestimate the pressure that will be put on those states to federalize their rising costs: inflation hits everyone, and governments are generally less efficient than private companies and thus tend to meet rising costs by increasing revenue. When you can’t get more out of the locals you must go shopping in Washington. States will compete on their lobbying capabilities. More on this another time.

clip_image003[1]

Musing about inflation.

It has been some years since I seriously tackled this problem. When I was an editor of SURVIVE, runaway inflation was not high on the list of probable disasters. The most important one in expected value terms was nuclear war, and my assessment of that was that the best way to survive a nuclear war was not to have one. For various reasons we didn’t have that war.

We didn’t have other disasters such as a massive solar flare or some other global power outage.

The Cold War ended. Prosperity and progress seemed inevitable – recall that there was a serious prediction of The End of History – and the survivalist movement dwindled to a tiny remnant. There is still a finite but not easily quantified probability of a huge disaster, and some people do prepare for such things. Those interested might find Lloyd Tackitt’s A DISTANT EDEN (available on Amazon in print or Kindle edition) worth reading: it’s a novel that goes into some details and suggests more techniques, and does a pretty good job of showing just how vast such a disaster might be.

Now, however, with the re-election of Mr. Obama (and given his post election speeches) increased inflation seems inevitable, and the wise will pay some attention to preparing for it. We’ll look into such matters in the next few weeks.

clip_image003[2]

The most important principle to understand is that inflation is a tax on savings and fixed incomes. Savings accounts already lose money – the interest rates are far lower than the costs of inflation. Many financial advisors do not seem to understand the inflation problem: for those with substantial sums to invest should look for financial advice, but do understand that many financial advisors are stock and bond salespeople and make most of their living by steering their clients into buying certain funds and investments. Sometimes that is a good idea, but one wants to be careful.

A second principle is that you want to be able to accumulate things that you will need. This is technically known as hoarding, and there will be many who will discourage you from doing that. One thing you know you will need is food. Hoarding food requires some preparation. Canned food has a finite life. Fruits and grains are vulnerable to rats and rot. One may not have insect and rodent proof storage facilities, but in times of inflation many neighbors will begin to save by eliminating their pest control services, which will increase the risk of pest destruction of your hoards. If you are thinking of building or improving your house, insect and rodent proofing is a major consideration.

Current rises in food prices, particularly storable goods, have not been much (or any) higher than interest rates, so storage of edible goods would not have been a great idea for the past couple of years, but we are now guaranteed four more years of current policies, some of which will certainly impact the cost of maize and other consumer edibles.

These are the kinds of things one needs to think of. Obviously there are many different people in many different situations, and the same tactics will not be optimum for all. There are general principles. One is that you will have to eat, and food prices will tend to rise in inflationary times. Price controls will limit the supply. In a time of rising prices, hoarding of durable consumables is generally a good financial idea, but those who do it will be blackguarded and sometimes robbed with government approval.

It’s time to take Sable for a walk – she very much enjoys our walks although they have to be shorter now – so I’ll leave this here.

Inflation is coming. It has appeared to be kept under control, but as the deficit rises and spending continues, there will first be moves to increase revenue, then to pay for entitlements with printed money. Printing money keeps the expenditures going, but entitlements don’t usually work to grow the economy. Austerity doesn’t stimulate an economy either.

And at some point people will notice that there is a lot more money chasing the same goods, and the prices will rise.

Be prepared.

clip_image003[3]

More about this another time, but Sixty Minutes tonight had a segment on jobs available: thousands in Nevada, in manufacturing. But they can’t fill them. Job applicants don’t show up on time, can’t write a grammatical sentence, don’t seem to understand the elements of skilled labor. They don’t know simple arithmetic.

My wife points out that most of this comes from people not learning to read. I’ve told this before, but my mother was a first grade teacher in rural Florida in the 1920’s. I asked her if any of her pupils left first grade without learning to read.  She said a few did, but they didn’t learn anything else, either – that is, it was expected that any child of normal intelligence would learn to read in first grade. It was expected that the teacher would see to that. There were no learned theories on why kids did not learn to read. It was just expected that they would, and that the teachers would teach them.

Of course in those ancient times the pupils were expected to learn the beginnings of the Addition tables.  I think the Times Tables came in second and third grade, but I’m not sure. What I do know is that modern schools with their well educated teachers who hold credentials do not seem to be able to do what my mother with her two year certificate from Florida Normal was expected to do.

And I don’t know of any school district in California that expects all the children to learn to read in first grade. We know it’s possible. Why don’t we insist on it?

 

clip_image003[4]

clip_image003[5]

clip_image003[6]

clip_image005

clip_image003[7]

Four More Years

View 749 Friday, November 09, 2012

It’s time to stop brooding over the election and do some rational analysis. We have four more years of President Obama. What will the consequences be, and what is the prudent way to prepare for the various contingencies?

As I was preparing to write that, the news of the Petraeus resignation came in. I generally don’t comment on breaking news, and I certainly don’t know enough to analyze either the cause or consequences of this story. Many questions arise. It seems impossible to believe that the timing of all this, breaking just after the election and just before the Congressional inquiry about the Benghazi issue, is coincidental. General Petraeus’ indiscretions were not all that much of a secret the troops. Many generals deployed overseas have had extra-marital affairs. The troops generally knew, and the wives generally found out. And just what did the FBI think it was doing conducting an investigation of Company affairs? Who was involved in covering up what? Why did Mr. Petraeus bring up the Mohammed Video long after almost everyone acquainted with the facts knew it was irrelevant? Was he ordered to do that? There are few who could issue such an order. And what will Mr. Petraeus, now an unemployed civilian, tell the Congress? Anything at all? None of this makes enough sense to justify serious comment, and indeed even some of the questions seem silly, but someone must ask them. We are dealing with an honorable man, and there must be some logic to his decisions.

clip_image002

The election is over, and the Republicans lost. There were probably election irregularities – there generally are – but not enough to have affected the result. The issues in the election were not obscure. President Obama took pains to say that a vote for him was a vote to continue his policies, and the outcome of the election was important. This probably cost him votes – he got fewer than he did in 2008 – but it certainly was not deceptive. The electorate knew the stakes, and Romney got fewer votes than McCain did. There is a sense in which both candidates lost this election, but the practical outcome was that Mr. Obama won Four More Years. Everyone had an opportunity to give a definitive opinion. Only a relatively small number did so. Those who did made a decision. That decision has consequences.

There will not be a repeal of Obamacare. There probably won’t be much of a compromise on the coming rise in taxes. We can speculate on what the next budget will be, and what happens if there isn’t one. Mr. Clinton and Mr. Gingrich used the election of 1994 to cut spending, reform welfare, and balance the budget; it is not likely that the current President and Speaker will be able to work such miracles.

Meanwhile the spending continues. The deficit rises. Some inflation is certain, and there is a possibility of hyperinflation. We will continue to borrow money but also to create it by running the printing presses. Inflation will wipe out many living on fixed incomes and/or savings: inflation is a tax on savings, and it is a rather brutal one. That will swell the rolls of those needing public assistance, requiring more spending, which will probably bring more inflation.

That is the first lesson: prepare for inflation.

clip_image002[1]

Obamacare will become law. That will end many current health plans. Yours may go away. The Obamacare Act is so badly drafted and has so many fundamental flaws that there will be many law suits, and a bonanza for lawyers; we will be years finding out what was in that Act. As of now no one – not one person on this Earth – actually knows. We do know that this election can and will be viewed as a referendum on expanding the health care obligation of the government. Obamacare was designed to eliminate most private health care systems, and over time it will achieve that. It can’t be repealed for at least four years; there is some question of whether, given four years of implementation, it can be repealed at all.

It can of course be amended, and since its author wants a ‘single payer’ health care system, it might be prudent to examine various implementations of that. The candidates seem to be the British and the French systems. Both are expensive. So is Obamacare. It is now time to have a rational discussion of centralized single payer health care systems.

One of the largest expenses of health care is the last two years of life. The question is, whose obligation is it to pay for expensive extreme measures to prolong life? And is there any limit to be imposed? Who decides to terminate payment? Inevitably that will be called a death panel. Perhaps they ought simply to be named death panels.

I was musing today about this question, and I came up with a very strange idea. I describe this: I am not advocating it, and in fact I don’t even know how it might be implemented. I describe it as one way of looking at the problem.

Suppose that for every person for which expensive and drastic measures are proposed to be paid for out of the public purse, a death panel of 100,000 people is created. They are told the name and conditions of the subject. They vote how much to tax themselves to keep this person alive. Will you pay a dollar a month? For how many months? Send in your dollar with your vote. If the expenses turn out to be less than $100,000 a month (and if that much is available my prediction is that this is what it will cost) then the money is credited to your account when you are appointed to another death panel (and you will be, of course). When fewer than a majority of the death panel votes to continue paying for this patient, public payment stops. This does not prevent family or charity from continuing to pay for care, but it does end public obligation.

Now as a hard science fiction writer I am immediately suspicious of the possibility of implementing and enforcing anything like this, but my purpose was to come up with a scheme that lays the obligation and decision on the same people and come up with a mechanism for doing it. At least those making the decision are paying for its implementation.

clip_image002[2]

All right, my death panel is silly; but what mechanism will we use? All indications are that one of the crushing costs of public health care are those paid for terminal care. Get those under control and the task becomes somewhat less impossible. Could we have a rule that says that the public is not obligated to pay for more than four weeks of care for someone who cannot say he wants that care? Eight weeks? A year? Who makes that decision? If we have to accept universal health care, what does that mean? It can’t mean unlimited obligation because we don’t have unlimited resources. What are the limits? With insurance companies the limits are more obvious – when the company goes broke there is no more money. With government you can continue printing money but that too has consequences.

clip_image003

We will have Four More Years. It is time to give some thought to how those years are to be spent, and what will replace them.

clip_image002[3]

Niven & Benford at Google.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-PF32jdqkw>

Roland Dobbins

It’s about an hour, and it’s worth your hour. Recommended.

clip_image002[4]

clip_image002[5]

clip_image005

clip_image002[6]

The morning after

View 749 Wednesday, November 07, 2012

The Morning After

clip_image002

I had actually thought that it would not be close: that Mr. Obama had made it clear that this was a key election which would have a real effect on coming policies. That, I thought, would be enough to galvanize those who understood it, and there would be far more who found it terrifying than who found it hopeful. We tried hope and change.

I was clearly wrong. Apparently a number of people did take Mr. Obama seriously, and found something threatening in that.

The odd part is that a majority of those voting believes that government is too large. I don’t know what that means.

clip_image002[1]

Ben Stein’s commentary this morning is well worth your time: http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/07/a-painful-night

clip_image002[2]

California seems to have a majority of people challenged in both ethics and simple intelligence. The tax raise was sold on a ‘soak the rich’ ‘Robin Hood’ tax that would fall only on the rich, and was necessary because without it there would be these drastic cuts in schools. Of course the same budget spent more money than the tax would raise on raises in pensions and salaries for commissions and other additional needless spending: there was never an offer to vote to reject those and apply the money to the schools.

So. Rob the rich to pay for the schools and pay the pensions. That’s the ethical decision. And ignore the fact that the rich have the option of leaving the state, and many already have. More will. Meanwhile, most of the money the new ‘temporary’ taxes will be from increased sales taxes, and many of those will fall on those who thought they were soaking the rich. That’s the intelligence test.

The public employees and teacher unions turned out as expected. They understood the stakes.

clip_image002[3]

The American people, narrowly, voted for Free Stuff. They won’t get much of it, and they’ll pay for it; but that’s for the future. Of course the new taxes will not generate the expected revenue.

clip_image002[4]

Despair is a sin.

clip_image002[5]

"Free stuff" and the election

Jerry:

I agree with the "Free Stuff" diagnosis, but am mystified by the attribution of it to Mr. Obama specifically, or Democrats generally.

The Democrats have made it plain that taxes need to be raised to pay for Stuff; the Republicans keep saying, "No, no, tax cuts will pay for everything." The strange thing is, this appears to rely on a repeal of supply and demand. Mr. Norquist keeps having Congresscritters toe his line about cutting government services to low, LOW discount prices, yet strangely he doesn’t appear to believe demand for those services won’t rise given the "ON SALE" banner the GOP keeps insisting on flying.

No, let’s face it… The great irony is, the Republican Party has fallen prey to the Iron Law. The goal of party internal cohesion and institutional groupthink has come to far outweigh such seemingly trivial concerns like governing responsibly, or winning elections.

The only difference between the Republicans and the Libertarians these days is one of scale — neither of them have real world concerns.

And voters have picked up on that. It’s a good chunk of why, as of now, the GOP has lost the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 presidential elections, and hasn’t run a ticket that’s won the popular vote on their first try since 1988.

Your own comments deriding Mr. Obama’s promotion of "hope and change" help paint the picture as well. The GOP has become all about fear, and promoting the idea of hopeless despair where nothing ever changes — at least, not for the better. Even if one is genuinely concerned about the future, it’s not the kind of vision to which people willingly devote blood, sweat, toil, tears, and votes. The contrast with the sunny optimism of Ronald Reagan couldn’t be more stark.

Even if one disagrees with him on policy, Mr. Obama has always recognized that optimism sells. Just as Mr. Reagan did. The substance may be different, but the more Reaganesque candidate in presentation won last night. And that too is ironic.

Hoping this finds you well,

— Hal

An interesting observation. I think it rests on the wrong interpretation of Mr. Obama’s actions, but perhaps not. As to Republicans and the Republican Establishment having succumbed to the Iron Law, that has always been true. It happened in Congress during the Reagan Administration, which is why Newt Gingrich was so upsetting to them, making his speeches in the empty chambers and attacking the Democrats. He actually got along better with Clinton than George H W Bush – at least that’s my observation and I was there.

I invite comments on your other observations.

 

clip_image002[6]

I will note that I wasn’t the only one who was fairly certain  that Mr. Romney would win. The market clearly bet that way, which is why it has fallen so rapidly today.

And I just heard that neither Romney nor Obama ran ahead of legalization of marijuana where they were on the ballot. I do not have the details, but that sounds interesting.

clip_image002[6]

Jerry:

I posted this on Monday night, perhaps under a premonition of how things would turn out:

http://andstillipersist.com/2012/11/the-gods-of-the-copybook-headings-illustrated/

The introduction to this post links back to a posting of the same poem (sans photos) four years earlier, which in turn links to your posting of the poem on your blog back in 2003 (http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2mail/mail269.html#copybook).

In any case, the photos underscore how painfully relevant and current the poem remains nearly a century later.

Bruce F. Webster

Well done.

clip_image002[6]

clip_image004

clip_image002[7]