Georgia and the Sudetenland

I heard an interesting opinion on NPR this evening on the way home from work. The topic was the Georgian-Russian conflict that is going on as I speak. The expert, a history professor, was comparing the similarities between modern Russia and Germany between the world wars. Both nations, he argued, were feeling that they had fallen and needed to reassert their national greatness. Both nations want/ed to reestablish their "natural" territorial boundaries. The analogy was chilling. The expert went on to suggest that the unified West should stop Russian integration into the EU, punish the Russians by dissolving their special committees in the UN, and so forth.

And let us not forget the recent tendency of the Russian government to assassinate annoying ex-patriots in other sovereign countries.

If Russia is in the same position as Germany circa 1938, I don't know why this expert thinks any of the things he suggested will make a damn bit of difference. Does anyone think that canceling the Olympics in 1936 would have stopped Hitler's Germany from its aggressive course of action? This is a Neville Chamberlain tactic and it is doomed to the same results, again, assuming the analogy between Germany and Russia holds water. The ONLY thing that would have checked Germany would have been a military response by England, France, etc. When the "Allied" world did not respond militarily, then Hitler saw it as a lack of resolve and was encouraged to go further. Plugged back into Russia's invasion of Georgia, whatever pretense they are using be it a need for "living room" or because they are "obligated a peacekeepers" the implications of the 1938 example are staggering.

Of course this isn't 1938. While we are in a recession as we were in '38, many other things are different. For example, the U.S. military is currently deployed meaning it is busy and not able to respond if it wanted to (and don't think the Russians don't know it.) Also, The Russians have nuclear weapons and that is the most chilling aspect of all. Take a moment to think what would have happened during WWII if Hitler had had nuclear capability in 1938.

One thing is the same though. The thought of getting a unified anything from the West is just as absurd now as it was then. If 1938 is the truest analogy in history, then as in 1938, I am sure that, human nature being what it is, we will delay too long before acting.

4x100 Men's Relay

Congrats to the U.S. Men's 4x100 relay team. Last night was super exciting! Congrats also the the qualifying team that broke a record to get us to the finals; your work, although less glamorous than the photo finish of the final, was no less crucial. That footage is among the all time great Olympic moments.

Congrats also to Katie Hoff who took silver. We were cheering for you so hard. Your every bit as great as anyone on the U. S Swim Team. You rock!

Olympic mercenaries

Maybe I’m over-sensitive, but something I’ve seen in the Olympics really bothers me. I’m used to modern baseball, football, etc teams trading players. The NBA has players from all over the world. Yet, it really bothers me when Olympians, including coaches to some extent, immigrate to other countries for the sole purpose of having an easier road to the Olympics. I guess I think the Olympics are supposed to be different; that it is about representing your country instead of finding an international sponsor so you can get in. I think the Olympics are about each country sending its own, native grown, very best to the games instead of hiring mercenaries to do its athletics for it. There are exceptions, of course, like the now-German gymnast who moved to Germany to find leukemia treatments for her child, but they seem to be the exception, not the rule. Instead this seems like the Olympics are taking yet another step to make them indistinguishable from professional athletics with a four year championship.

SUVs vs Crossovers

Has anyone seen the Chevy advertisement where it starts out taking about how not all SUV’s have bad gas mileage and then goes on to talk about the new Chevy CROSSOVER? Maybe someone should tell GM that an SUV is is not the same thing as a Crossover. A Crossover is a car designed for the late 20’s person whose life style is crossing over (get it?) from single and fancy free to family. Its not as sporty as a sports car, but not as, well, family as a minivan or an SUV. Hence the name.

This is like talking about how not all oranges are equally hard to peel and then doing an ad for your new apple.

Baby-Boomers of their word

I saw this on the BBC yesterday. My response is not suitable for children.

I was a bit outraged. It’s one thing to default on a loan because you can’t pay it. It’s another to default on a loan because you made a bad choice. Then I realized which generation we were talking about: the I shouldn’t have to be responsible for anything generation, the ME generation, the I-deserve-to-be-rescued-from-my-own-stupidity folks. You buy a house at an over inflated price. In a market that had experts warning that real estate was over-valued. And suddenly you should be able to just walk away and stick it to the folks who gave you the loan to do it? Stick to the man right? Stick it to BigBank. Jokes on them, right? Oh and stick it to their share holders. And their account holders. And the folks who work there. And the tax payers who will have to fund the bail-out. To quote John Travolta in Broken Arrow, “Fuck ‘em if they can’t take a joke.” And after all, isn’t your asshole just that much more important than that of your fellow creatures? It’s great, you made a mistake and now you don’t have to live with it. It’s like getting into a car drunk, getting pulled over, and getting to blame the passenger for letting you drive.

Who selected the house, jack ass? You did. Who decided to buy it. You again, jack ass. And who should have to eat the consequences if the house falls in value?

Oh, it would have meant dipping into your retirement? Oh well you shouldn’t have to do that? Nope. Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, and never having to dip into your retirement account are your rights as an American. Absolutely. Your retirement is much more important than the salary of the bank employee who gets laid off. Why? Obviously because its yours and they are just a faceless bank person. We all know how much more important YOU are.

You selfish turd.

Now, I don’t have any sympathy for BigBank who got itself over extended. I hate BigBanks with a passion, I really do. And they are taking it on the chin because they were stupid to lend money in the first place for property that wasn’t worth it. They should have had the expertise, but instead they had greed. And now they are getting bent over and I revel in it.

Right up to the point where you decide the financially best thing to do is walk away and stick it to them when you don’t have to. Thousands of Americans are honest-to-God worried about HOW they will afford their next house payment. People are being evicted who NEED their houses and who got suckered into bad loans because they were stupid, ignorant, or uninformed. But you are just gonna walk away, not because you have to, but because you don’t want to have to make that payment that you could make. And in doing that you will damage the economy and make it even worse for all the others who don’t have your ability to choose. Aren’t you just a saint?

So here’s what I hope. I hope you end up not able to find a new place to live, having cast away your last one. I hope you end up with nowhere to live. I hope you end up living in a cardboard box, and a leaky one at that. Of course, you would probably think that someone should rescue you from that particular bad decision too. After all, it wasn’t your fault was it?

Fat Chance

Learned something stupid on NPR today and I couldn’t wait to blog about it. It seems that the lovely city of Los Angeles noticed that they have the highest concentration of obese people in south LA as well as the highest concentration of fast food establishments in south LA. Realizing immediately the crisis this posed to their fair city where everyone must be California thin, they acted with dispatch and put a moratorium (ban) on constructing any new fast food places in that area.

1) That would be the government telling you that you can’t do something with your land which, IMHO is a “taking.” Further, it is discriminatory taking that violates principles of free trade since it isn’t against all restaurants, just those which are “fast food.” (Leave aside that the issue of determining which places are fast food and which are not is entirely subjective and that almost all fast food places offer a salad and all sit down places offer something high calorie and fattening.) This is like saying you can put in a Target store but not a Wal-Mart. This measure is illegal.

2) Some major assumptions about cause and effect seem to be in play here. The City Council assumes, or at least their remedy assumes, that the proliferation of “fast food” is what causes the obesity (and that obesity is bad and that they are obligated to clean it up). But what if the fast food has come to be where it is because that is where the obese people are? What if there is something in the life habits of the obese people that makes fast food more appetizing? If that’s the case, the proliferation of fast food is only a symptom and not a cause. Banning it simply means the obese people will have to travel further for it, and this in a city that already battles smog and pollution. Further, the ban hurts the economy and may cause a slight slow down in local construction.

3) The Council is apparently looking for a way to encourage non-fast food restaurants to move into the city and hopes that this moratorium will both give them time to think of a better way to fix the “problem” as well as allow non-fast food places to get established. The restaurant association points out that many people who patronize fast food do so because it is, theoretically, fast. This dovetails with the previous point, but if that is the case then there is no reason to think that by stopping the development of new fast food places, you will somehow get people to go to “slow food” places if they don’t have time. Maybe the reason that no sit-down places really existed in the area is because they can’t survive there. If that is the case, this measure only stops the development of vacant lots that would otherwise become something.

4) I think we also need to ask ourselves where this road is going. Here in Illinois we banned smoking in all public places and within 15 feet of the door to such a place. Of course it’s for our own good and we should trust in the legislature to know best what that is; after all we ordinary citizens aren’t really smart enough to do so. Now L.A. is passing laws to deal with obesity, for its citizen’s own good, etc. What’s next? Will we legislatively impose the food pyramid upon the population for its own good. Make it a misdemeanor to eat more than one candy bar in a week? Will we say you can’t eat a Big Mac in a public building? Maybe all food should be prepared by government chef’s using approved recipes constructed by expert nutritionists and served in city cafeterias?

Nope, not a fan of this. I think I’ll have Big Mac for lunch out of protest.

McCain vs McCane

Some have wondered why I seem to use both spellings for the current GOP contender. The answer is that I can never remember which one is correct and got tired of looking it up on CNN all the time. So I alternate or just pick one. I do try to be consistent within the same post. What can I say, I'm lazy.

Smoking -- What's the point

BACKGROUND: Illinois recently passed an anti-smoking law that prohibits smoking within public buildings or 15 feet of the door to a public building.

At the courthouse today, I was walking along and I noticed a new sign painted on the door, “Smoking prohibited within 15 feet of this point.” For some reason, I started thinking which is always a bad thing when confronted with public notices. Back in the day, I took a geometry class and was actually not too bad at it which is why I have an issue with this sign. The door in question was a double door so call it a 6 foot by 8 foot rectangle.

Query: What exactly is the “point” from which I should measure to make sure I am in conformity with the notice?

See, that door is a geometric plane with an infinite number of points (and that’s not even allowing for the opening of the door which creates an infinite number of planes, each with an infinite number of points). When you label a plane with a sign referring to this point, suddenly your sign becomes meaningless. Which point exactly do you mean? Further, for any point you pick within the plane, I can find another point somewhere in space which is more than 15 feet from your point but still within 15 feet of a point in the door’s rectangle.

Why oh why didn’t whoever painted the sign simply say, “No smoking within 15 feet of the DOOR?”

Tax experts

NPR had a tax specialist on Fresh Air yesterday to give us the “truth” about McCane and Omaba’s tax proposals. I had several problems with his expertise: 1) He kept using the words “bigger/smaller” and “more/less” without explaining if he meant a raw figure or a percentage. Ex: McCane’s proposal would result in bigger tax savings for the upper income bracket. Does he mean they would save more in absolute terms or that they would be able to save a bigger percentage? 2) He frequently referred to low, middle, and upper incomes without telling us where he made the demarcation. Is $50,000.00 annually low, middle, or upper? Where is 30K? etc. 3) He was rather blasé about estate taxes claiming that the dead don’t need their money any longer. This would be a fine argument IF all we are talking about taking was the liquid assets of the deceased. However consider the following: Family farm of 1000 acres in the bottom land near Labadie, Missouri; been in the family 150 years; currently owned by little old widow who share crops it, land in Labadie is on the very boarder of suburban St. Louis and has shot up in assessed valuation because it is now prime subdivision land. Little old widow dies and the land becomes her estate, administered by her farmer son. They are farmers and don’t have a lot of liquidity, either in the son or the estate, however the value of the family farm’s LAND shoots the total estate value over into the millions of dollars, triggering estate tax; triggering a LOT of estate tax. The estate and the heirs of course don’t have the CASH needed to pay the tax because the value is all tied up in land. In fact the only way the tax can be paid is to literally sell the farm to generate the cash to pay the tax. Now tell me the little old widow wouldn’t have cared about that. Of course Captain Harvard the tax expert just skipped right over that.

Obam's "World Tour"

Anyone else wondering why Obama is campaigning to the German and French voters? Is this to make him look more like a world leader and more in tune with international affairs. Maybe he wants to say he ducked sniper fire too.

Hell the BBC even called it his "World Tour." Maybe they will soon have concert T-shirts. Black Plague World Tour. Genghis Khan World Tour. Obama World Tour.