Mail 738 Wednesday, August 22, 2012

They Have "Wasteful" Government in Australia, Too –

Dr. Pournelle,

The Australian government has made a $45,000 grant for investigating turning dog poo into a renewable energy source. The article is

from the Watt’s Up With That? web site.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/19/climate-craziness-of-the-week-poo-power-from-your-dog/

The silly season knows no boundaries.

Jay Smith

Seems like a trivial amount of money. What does it cost to deal with dog poop now? S C Edison at one time wanted to experiment with the waste output of Oceanside to see if you could get enough energy from it to offset some of the cost of sewage processing, but the state regulators wouldn’t let them use ratepayer money for that experiment.

Jerry Pournelle

Chaos Manor

Dr. Pournelle,

Fair enough. I wasn’t aware of the other forays into extracting energy from waste. I’m dubious there is any real benefit to be found from these processes. I suppose spending $45,000 to find out one way or another isn’t a horrible use of taxpayer money.

Thanks for the response.

Jay Smith

A retraction on the loss of metaphors

Dr. Pournelle,

I wrote you sometime back bemoaning the loss, somewhat tounge-in-cheek, of some of our cultural metaphors to political correctness. You’d used the term "tar baby," and I’d run into a host of younger co-workers that particular week who didn’t understand the term, had never heard of Brer Rabbit, and who didn’t even know that Disney had ever considered producing anything as blatently racist (in modern terms) as "Song of the South."

I’ve got to take that all back. Somewhat belatedly, I’m reading Neil Gaiman’s _Anansi Boys_, where he correctly re-tells the tar baby story in something close to the original African fairy tale style. Of course, in the story it is Anansi’s children who set up the Tar Man, not Brer Rabbit’s tar baby. In the story, it is Anansi himself who gets stuck due to perniciousness and greed.

Of course, most of my co-workers have never heard of Anansi, either, and only no a little mythology, either because of exposure in an elective freshman college course (Gods forbid we teach mythology in high school any more) or via secondary exposure in more shallow fiction.

Gaiman is keeping a lot of the old mythology alive and in context. I guess that we’re really not losing the metaphors so much as having them corrected.

-d

We read the story of Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby in about Fourth Grade in Capleville school in Tennessee, but I guess they don’t do that now.

Subject: Denise Barton of California Files $1.7 Billion Claim Alleging ‘Smart’ Meters Making Her Sick

Yep….the crazy years are upon us. I really think the lawyer who took this lawsuit on should do jail time.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/08/denise-barton-of-california-files-1-7-billion-claim-alleging-smart-meters-making-her-sick/

Tracy

I guess it’s the silly season for lawyers too…

"Allies"

Dear Mr. Pournelle:

Your correspondent "G" raises some interesting points in his note on "Allies," regarding protection of the people. His main argument, that "big government and big business are natural allies", especially deserves consideration.

I’ve long found that to be one of the few persuasive arguments in the rhetoric of the old Anarchist movement; that political and economic powers will naturally enter into collusion, so there’s no point trying to reform either — tear them down. But anarchism is untenable. So where do we go? I’m unwilling to submit to the notion that we’re inevitably to be dominated by Behemoths; and the American experiment of checks and balances seems to me to be the most plausible alternative yet devised.

I agree there will be a strong *tendency* for government to collude with economic power. But it isn’t inevitable; your correspondent cites, appropriately, Theodore Roosevelt. I would like a counterbalance other than government: I don’t see one. In that highly imperfect situation, it seems to me that one reasonable strategy is to support those candidates and political parties which seem *least* in collusion with corporations. Currently, that appears to be liberals. That wasn’t always so. Theodore Roosevelt is clearly a counterexample; Dwight D. Eisenhower is a more recent one.

I return to the question of *power imbalance.* There’s no point talking about preserving freedom unless we can find some way to restrain economic power. I’d like to find some option better than a Hobbesian Leviathan; but I have little patience with any political position which doesn’t see a problem in the growing power of corporations.

As a lesser point, your correspondent argues "Even today little tinhorn states around the world routinely nationalize or blackmail multinational corporations without fear." Routinely? That may be excessive. Nevertheless, it would be odd for him to suggest that the only practical alternative to corporate dominance is Marxist dictatorship… I really, really don’t want to go down that road. We could easily have drifted that direction in the 1930’s, and that should be warning enough.

So here’s where I sit. Marxism, Anarchism, and corporate oligarchy are all intolerable. I’m firmly enough convinced of the doctrine of original sin that I really don’t expect any political approach to these problems to be either flawless or stable. Yes, government intervention is clumsy and will sometimes bite us. Given that we’re working with fallen humans, I would expect no less. There may be alternatives, but I’d expect them to be equally flawed. I’d be interested if your correspondent could list some.

Allan E. Johnson

I have always held the theory that Marx had a great deal of truth in his theory of concentration of power, and that the anti-trust movement in the United States saved this nation from many of the horrid consequences of such concentrations. David McCord Wright, one of my favorite economists, always held that view. I would be very much in favor of reintroducing the trust busters. I was opposed to the persecution of Microsoft because it was ill conceived, but not on principle. I do not like corporate ‘growth’ by buying up the competition, and I certainly believe that any bank that is too big to fail is too big to exist.

I have the same view of government.

But then I have always been for transparency and subsidiarity as general principles. I’ve said all this many times, of course.

Pretty Good: http://de.webfail.at/image/i-am-your-father-win-bild.html

Indeed

Men to Mars

Jerry,

I remember reading a 1996 book called "The Case For Mars" by a NASA engineer called Zubrin. According to my fallible memory Zubrin’s scheme was to use off the shelf Proton rockets to fly a nuclear powered, Victorian technology, chemical plant which would combine the Martian atmosphere with a cargo of hydrogen to make methane, water, and oxygen. Another rocket would carry living quarters and only when this had been accomplished would a crew be sent. It certainly seemed plausible to me as the scheme relied on known technology. Certainly there would be a lot of R&D to make this possible, but essentially it would need no need no new discovery, only improved plumbing. One big plus would be that everything except the crew’s ship could be duplicated at a reasonable cost. On arrival the astronauts would have fuel for exploring and for the return trip, and water and oxygen for life support. At the time it struck me as being no more dangerous than flying a Starfighter.

John Edwards

I have known Zubrin for a long time, and while his scheme looks very plausible, I for one do not know how to get people to Mars alive if there is anything like a solar flare. And I don’t really think we know enough about keeping them alive once there.

I do think we could build a viable Lunar Colony with today’s technology, and we could learn from it about staying alive in the space environment. Moon next. Then Mars.

Space weather is worse than most of us think it is.

Rothschild Bets Against Euro

This is an interesting move by the most powerful family in Europe; perhaps, the most powerful family in the world:

<.>

If the actions of Lord Jacob Rothschild are anything to go by, the long predicted collapse of the Euro may not be far away, with the banking titan placing a $200 million dollar bet against the troubled single currency.

“Lord Rothschild, an elder member of the dynastic Rothschild banking family, has taken the position against the euro through RIT Capital Partners, the 1.9 billion pound investment trust of which he is executive chairman,” reports CNBC.

RIT has upped its short against the Euro from 3 per cent in January to 7 per cent in July.

</>

http://www.infowars.com/lord-rothschild-betting-on-euro-collapse/

—–

Most Respectfully,

Joshua Jordan, KSC

Percussa Resurgo

Well, perhaps he knows something…

Why all your correspondents urging the use of hollowpoint ammunition are dead wrong.

Yes, in most cases, hollowpoint rounds do a better job of stopping the target via expansion and the resultant wounding. Yes, hollowpoint rounds are generally safer in terms of through-and-through penetration and resultant collateral damage.

But that’s nothing compared to what a prosecutor a la Trayvon or a civil attorney representing the family of the deceased will do to you in a courtroom.

If you use anything other than full-metal jacket ammo; if you customize your weapon in any way for safer, more accurate handling (Pachmyr grips, integral laser sights, etc.); you will stand accused of being a dangerous, homicidal fanatic just looking for any excuse at all to make your own day by shooting someone, a mad-dog danger to the community who, far from acting in self-defense, went out on the date in question looking for someone to kill in what was at the very least second-degree murder, if not outright pre-planned first-degree homicide.

The facts of the case will be irrelevant. The point that you were acting in self-defense in fear of your life and with no avenue of retreat will be irrelevant. You will be made out to be a kindred spirit to Charles Whitman and Anton Brevik, acting out of various officially-proscribed thoughtcrimes such as racism, sexism, homophobia, religious bias, Republicanism, Christianity, and so forth. They will their best to convict and imprison you, as well as to sue and bankrupt you (the first greatly contributing to the probability of success of the second).

So, it’s far better to be selfish and to forego more secure grips, more accurate sights, and safer ammunition in order to immunize oneself as much as possible against post-self-defense legal assault by distinguished officers of the court, members of the bar, and the larger racial grievance community.

This isn’t speculation; I’ve seen this sort of thing play itself out multiple times. As a result, sensible law enforcement agencies forbid their armed operatives – with exceptions for SWAT-type paramilitaries, who apparently can employ field artillery and air-strikes with impunity – from customizing their weapons in any way, from using anything other than full-metal jacket ammunition, and even from utilizing accessories such as cutaway holsters or under-arm clip carriers.

Roland Dobbins

Philadelphia woman faces $600-a-day fine for feeding needy neighborhood kids

Evidently her crime was not getting permission from the government to help

other people out.after all, that IS the purview of the

government, not the citizens, when you live in a Socialist State.

Subject: Philadelphia woman faces $600-a-day fine for feeding needy

neighborhood kids

Published August 14, 2012

A Pennsylvania woman who offers free lunch every day to low-income children

in her neighborhood faces a $600-a-day fine next summer

if she continues because she did not clear the food giveaway with township

officials.

Angela Prattis donates her time to distribute the meals — supplied by the

Archdiocese of Philadelphia — and adheres to strict

paperwork, like filling out weekly reports and being visited bi-weekly from

a state worker, MyFoxPhilly.com reports. Philadelphia

News, Weather and Sports from WTXF FOX 29 <http://www.myfoxphilly.com/>

"Angela saw it as a way to contribute to the community in a positive way,"

Anne Ayella, a member of the archdiocese, said. "There

was nothing in it for her."

Prattis laughed and said, "I don’t make a dime."

Prattis lived in the township for three years. She reportedly distributes

the meals to the 60 or so children at a gazebo on her

property during the summer months, when children are home from school.

The Delaware County Times reports that another resident alerted the council

about the distribution a few weeks ago. The council

investigated and ruled that the practice is not permitted without a

variance, the paper reported.

"You have houses here, the roofs are falling in, and they could be focused

on a lot of more serious issues than me feeding

children," she said.

Chester Township, which has a per capita income of $19,000 a year, says

Prattis lives in a residential zone, hence handing out food

to children is not allowed. The township says she needs to go before a

zoning board to ask for a variance, which would cost her up

to $1,000 in administrative fees.

"I don’t think it’s my responsibility to go to her to say, ‘why don’t you

come to talk to me to see if there’s something that we can

do to help your program,’" William Pisarek, the Chester Township business

manager, said.

Prattis told The Delaware County Times that she is not going to stop feeding

the children in the area.

Well at least it’s local. Wait until Obama tries to ‘solve this problem’ with a national policy.

Jerry Pournelle

Yep…that is a good point….and after I sent the email, I realized that when the township business manager said:

"I don’t think it’s my responsibility to go to her to say, ‘why don’t you come to talk to me to see if there’s something that we can do to help your program,’" William Pisarek, the Chester Township business manager, said."

…that he didn’t think it was his responsibility to help out someone doing a good thing, even with a phone call to suggest she come to his office and pay homage to him before continuing her work. He did however, have time to ensure that she felt the sting of a bureaucrat’s ire for not properly kowtowing to him without prompting through the threat of fines.

Tracy

I am far less concerned about thickheaded town clerks than I am about building a federal bureaucracy to “fix the problem”.