If You Don’t Like Inflation, Calculate it Differently

A bit ago, I wrote a blog entry titled “If it’s not worth your time, change what you do“.  Such is the situation for individuals in the Nation.  Not so for our Nation’s government.  They apparently have the power to redefine whatever they want.

As the government wrangles over how to reign in the insane national deficit, so that it stops adding so much to our national debt, they just aren’t able to agree on changes to make it happen.  That irritating effect of compound interest and inflations makes every plan fail in a few years.  So.. I guess.. we’ll change the definition of inflation!

Wall Street Journal, Wednesday 22, 2011, page A4, “One idea under consideration is to change the way inflation is measured..”  The idea is they tweak the definition so that inflation indexed benefits go down while they can say they didn’t cut the benefits.  What smoke and mirror childishness.  It’s like your child negotiating that his room is clean by raising the number of shirts and socks he can leave strewn all over.  What a joke.  Does it need to be pointed out that how they define it has nothing to do with what it feels like to experience it? 

It appears they simply have no spine to stand up and say, “Enough! We have to stop spending money!”  — or (sadly), the constituents are too naive so as to simply vote a person out of office unless they contort some way to keep the government free trough in place.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Kazakhstan Government Edict Alienates Google

Kazakhstan is the largest of the Central Asian nation states that broke away from Russia in the early 1990s.  As reported in the WSJ, the Kazakhstan government has ordered that all Kazakhstan domains route traffic to servers in country. The assumed reason is so they can evesdrop on all traffic. Technically, this seems strange. One could register a .kz domain and host a website on servers in North America.  Someone from the state of Kentucky could query the page.  Traffic would never visit Kazakhstan. Is the government requiring that all traffic be routed in country first?

I don’t think this directly affects Google’s search functionality.  It’s not filtering or blocking like China tried to accomplish.  Instead, it would require the round-about circuitous travel of packets once someone tries to read a .kz web  page.  Google stopped routing traffic to it’s google.kz server and instead dumped all the traffic onto it’s normal google.com server bank.

In Google’s words, “creating borders” on the internet is problematic in many ways.  They’re afraid of a Balkanized internet and isolated islands of the internet in disparate countries.  I wonder if this is why Google is hiring a Business Operations creative thinker to work on such problems.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Facebook Enages China

Wall Street Journal published “Facebook’s Test in China: What Price Free Speech” today.  Yahoo and Google have been down this path of dealing with China.  There is a tension between encryption/anonymity and surveillance/persecution in the Chinese nation.

Facebook wants everybody to share information between themselves and build a culture.  In America, I’m uncomfortable sharing all my info.  In China, even a real name can get you thrown in jail if you say the wrong thing.  Facebook CEO is dancing a line between a product model that requires American-style freedom to say and opine, and a desire to be international where such activity gets you jailed or shot.

Cultural commentator Clay Shirkyhas provided Facebook the argument to downplay US cultural concerns of censorship and invasions of privacy.

Social media create a valuable public sphere in which societies communicate about all sorts of subjects.  U.S. officials should take a longer-term view of the issue and support the expansion of these spheres rather than fixate on thoe problems of censorship.  The resulting public discussion, he said, will do more to prompt organic change.

In essense, he says we should value spheres of community more than individual rights. I guess “it takes a community” to globalize.  Let’s hope it doesn’t require the abdication of human rights.

Posted in Computers | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Sarah Palin Papers

So, some 24,000 pages of Governer Palin emails were released today.  FOI filers paid $725.97 each to receive 6 boxes of paper copies.

24,000 pages / 500 pages per ream / 12 reams per box => 4 boxes.  I wonder why the news releases say 6 boxes were required.

24,000 pages / $725.97 => 3 cents per page.  They must have a high-volume, low-cost printer. 🙂

One just has to ask.. Why in the world did they release these as paper.  Forget the copy cost.  It required some state employee all the time and burden to DO this for each customer.  I can’t fathom why they wouldn’t send out a CDROM containing the emails.

Posted in General | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

ObamaCare in Federal Court: Analysis of Arguments

ObamaCare is in Federal Appeal Court. The arguments for and against the mandatory participation are being crystallized. The critical issue is that people who would choose to not purchase insurance will be penalized by having to pay hundreds of dollars each year when they file taxes with the Federal government.  In essence, the arguments are:

  • Health costs for uninsured people are shifted to those with insurance. Everybody participates with health care choices and commerce.  Hence, this constitutes interstate commerce and can therefore be regulated by Federal Congress.
  • The choice to not buy health insurance cannot be construed as participation in commerce, so Congress does not have a role regulating it. If allowed, then any lack of activity can be designated commerce and regulated. Congressional power would have no limit.

For two reasons, I have to agree with the later argument:

  1. When someone else (the poor person getting free health care and shifting cost to me) chooses to take an action, how can that commerce be contrued so as to regulate me?  If you do something, that does not give Congress the right to regulate me.  Hmm.. how does that compare in analogous issues?  The fact the someone else illegally used guns causes my gun purchase to be regulated.  Okay, I can see that.  However, that would be regulation my attempt to purchase something, not not purchase something.  Which brings me to my second reason to agree with the later argument.
  2. The cost shifting argument is specious, that would not be tolerated in any other context. Consider the tight analogy that I might choose to pickup up a hitchhiker in my pickup truck.  And, by currently choosing to give rides, I would be choosing to subsidize non-drivers.  What right would Congress have to come in and now tell me I must purchase a truck in order to keep picking up hitchhikers–and penalize me financially if I do not purchase a truck of their choice?  There’s no way this argument would carry weight.
Posted in General | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment