Since I am a member of the Pamlico County Board of Elections, I am prohibited from publicly advocating or opposing the election of any candidate or ballot measure appearing on the ballot. But I am specifically allowed to be a delegate to party conventions.
This coming weekend, I will serve as a delegate to my party's district convention. Later, there will be a state convention, and finally the week of September 3, the Democratic Party will hold its national convention at Charlotte.
People sometimes ask what my party stands for. I know no better source than the speech delivered by William Jennings Bryan 116 years ago at the Democratic Party Convention of 1896. The issues haven't changed, though details may differ. Here are some excerpts:
"When you come before us and tell us that we shall disturb your
business interests, we reply that you have disturbed our business
interests by your action. We say to you that you have made too limited
in its application the definition of a businessman. The man who is
employed for wages is as much a businessman as his employer. The
attorney in a country town is as much a businessman as the corporation
counsel in a great metropolis. The merchant at the crossroads store is
as much a businessman as the merchant of New York. The farmer who goes
forth in the morning and toils all day, begins in the spring and toils
all summer, and by the application of brain and muscle to the natural
resources of this country creates wealth, is as much a businessman as
the man who goes upon the Board of Trade and bets upon the price of
grain. The miners who go 1,000 feet into the earth or climb 2,000 feet
upon the cliffs and bring forth from their hiding places the precious
metals to be poured in the channels of trade are as much businessmen as
the few financial magnates who in a backroom corner the money of the
world.We come to speak for this broader class of businessmen....
"What we need is an Andrew Jackson to stand as
Jackson stood, against the encroachments of aggregated wealth....
"Those who are opposed to this proposition tell
us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the
government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with
Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the
issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should
go out of the governing business....
"My friends, it is simply a
question that we shall decide upon which side shall the Democratic Party
fight. Upon the side of the idle holders of idle capital, or upon the
side of the struggling masses? That is the question that the party must
answer first; and then it must be answered by each individual hereafter.
The sympathies of the Democratic Party, as described by the platform,
are on the side of the struggling masses, who have ever been the
foundation of the Democratic Party....
"There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that if
you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their
prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has
been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their
prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon
it.
"If they dare to come out in the open field and defend the gold standard
as a good thing, we shall fight them to the uttermost, having behind us
the producing masses of the nation and the world. Having behind us the
commercial interests and the laboring interests and all the toiling
masses, we shall answer their demands for a gold standard by saying to
them, you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of
thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."
OK, the rhetoric is a bit over the top by modern standards, but the underlying struggle is pretty much the same:
Trickle-down economics or rising tide economics?
YOYO's or WITTS?
Friday, May 18, 2012
Thursday, May 17, 2012
South Avenue Contract
We attended this morning's special meeting of the town board concerning the proposed contract to close certain town rights of way (Avenue A and part of South Avenue plus other historic bits and pieces) in return for Chris Fulcher donating a portion of his waterfront property.
This meeting was the first significant opportunity for many members of the public to express their views. I think it's fair to say that most attendees were opposed to the contract in its present form. Those who spoke during the public comment period asked a number of questions about the legality and the advisability of the proposal. Several speakers (I was one) expressed doubt that the town had received competent legal representation.
Several speakers questioned whether the town had a complete picture of what it can build on the site in view of DENR and CAMA regulations. Some questioned whether touted advantages of the deal (an almost-completed pier and two historic structures) were going to be an asset or a liability. There was widespread disbelief that the parcel the town would receive is wide enough. Various speakers wondered whether Mr. Fulcher might block navigation by private boats.
Some speakers had researched restrictions on the existing town right of way for South Avenue and asserted that there are ways to obtain legislative approval to build some of the desired structures.
Several speakers objected to the assertions that "these rights of way are of no value" that supporters of the proposal have made. I offered the view that, "in coastal North Carolina, nothing is more valuable to the public than public access to the water."
After public comments were heard, the board deliberated and by a vote of 4-1 approved proceeding with the contract. (Warren Johnson voted "no").
At an afternoon continuation of the meeting, the board voted 4-0 to hold public hearings on street closures at the regular meeting of July 3.
This meeting was the first significant opportunity for many members of the public to express their views. I think it's fair to say that most attendees were opposed to the contract in its present form. Those who spoke during the public comment period asked a number of questions about the legality and the advisability of the proposal. Several speakers (I was one) expressed doubt that the town had received competent legal representation.
Several speakers questioned whether the town had a complete picture of what it can build on the site in view of DENR and CAMA regulations. Some questioned whether touted advantages of the deal (an almost-completed pier and two historic structures) were going to be an asset or a liability. There was widespread disbelief that the parcel the town would receive is wide enough. Various speakers wondered whether Mr. Fulcher might block navigation by private boats.
Some speakers had researched restrictions on the existing town right of way for South Avenue and asserted that there are ways to obtain legislative approval to build some of the desired structures.
Several speakers objected to the assertions that "these rights of way are of no value" that supporters of the proposal have made. I offered the view that, "in coastal North Carolina, nothing is more valuable to the public than public access to the water."
After public comments were heard, the board deliberated and by a vote of 4-1 approved proceeding with the contract. (Warren Johnson voted "no").
At an afternoon continuation of the meeting, the board voted 4-0 to hold public hearings on street closures at the regular meeting of July 3.
White Births In Minority
In the twelve-month period ending last July, according to the US Census Bureau, there were fewer white babies born in America than those of non white minorities.
Demographers had long expected this to occur, but weren't certain when.
I looked outside this morning. The sky has not yet fallen.
Demographers had long expected this to occur, but weren't certain when.
I looked outside this morning. The sky has not yet fallen.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
On Line Education
Occasionally Tom Friedman of the New York Times offers an interesting tidbit in his column. Today's tidbit is a reference to a very interesting new company offering high quality on-line education courses. The name of the company is Coursera.
It is worthwhile checking out Coursera's web site and at least looking at the syllabus of some of the course offerings. I saw several tempting courses. One course of particular interest to a wide range of people might be "Health Policy And The Affordable Care Act."
Check out Coursera's site.
It is worthwhile checking out Coursera's web site and at least looking at the syllabus of some of the course offerings. I saw several tempting courses. One course of particular interest to a wide range of people might be "Health Policy And The Affordable Care Act."
Check out Coursera's site.
In Extremis: Greece and Germany
In the ancient past (when I was learning the nautical rules of the road) we were taught that certain ships had the "right of way" when there was risk of collision while other ships were "burdened."
That terminology is no longer used, but the principal is much the same.
How do you know if there is risk of collision? If the other ship is CBDR - that is, on a constant bearing and decreasing range.
It was the duty of the ship having the right of way to maintain course and speed. It was the duty of the burdened vessel to maneuver to avoid collision.
What if both ships insist that they have the right of way and maintain course and speed? At some point, after sounding warning blasts on the ship's whistle, the ships become so close to each other that the only way to avoid collision is for both ships to act.
That situation was known as being "in extremis."
Greece and the European Central Bank have been on a collision course and now are in extremis. At least if the object is to keep Greece in the Eurozone, both vessels must put the helm over and take up a new course.
But no one is at the helm in Greece nor will anyone take the helm for at least a month. Nor is it apparent who is at the helm of the ECB, but it still looks like Germany has the conn.
Europe may be in for a humongous collision.
It's at least time to check out the life vests and life boats.
That terminology is no longer used, but the principal is much the same.
How do you know if there is risk of collision? If the other ship is CBDR - that is, on a constant bearing and decreasing range.
It was the duty of the ship having the right of way to maintain course and speed. It was the duty of the burdened vessel to maneuver to avoid collision.
What if both ships insist that they have the right of way and maintain course and speed? At some point, after sounding warning blasts on the ship's whistle, the ships become so close to each other that the only way to avoid collision is for both ships to act.
That situation was known as being "in extremis."
Greece and the European Central Bank have been on a collision course and now are in extremis. At least if the object is to keep Greece in the Eurozone, both vessels must put the helm over and take up a new course.
But no one is at the helm in Greece nor will anyone take the helm for at least a month. Nor is it apparent who is at the helm of the ECB, but it still looks like Germany has the conn.
Europe may be in for a humongous collision.
It's at least time to check out the life vests and life boats.
Nuclear Weapons Rethink?
Later today, Global Zero, a nuclear weapons organization, will issue a report calling for another significant reduction in our nuclear deterrence. Gen. James E. Cartwright, USMC, the retired vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff and a former commander of the United States’ nuclear forces, has joined with others calling for reduction in
the number of nuclear warheads below the levels set by agreements with
Russia.
Five years ago, we learned of the shocking error in our own nuclear force when six nuclear-armed missiles were inadvertently flown from Minot SD to Barksdale AFB Louisiana on a B-52 whose crew thought they were transporting dummy warheads. As I recall, the aircraft and warheads were parked in the open, unguarded, for two days before the error was found.
This incident showed a worrisome degradation in the system of administrative controls in place for nuclear weapons. If you think administrative controls are just boring minutia, you might want to watch the movie "Doctor Strangelove" again.
But the Global Zero report addresses only our strategic weapons. We still have thousands of "tactical" nuclear weapons not only in Europe but also on ships and bases around the world. The smallest of these have nuclear yields on the same order as that of the bomb we dropped on Hiroshima in August, 1945.
Tactical nuclear weapons are not covered by any international arms control agreement. Poland and Norway have asked that NATO consider extending arms control to cover tactical nuclear weapons.
Not a bad idea.
Do we know where our nuclear weapons are?
Five years ago, we learned of the shocking error in our own nuclear force when six nuclear-armed missiles were inadvertently flown from Minot SD to Barksdale AFB Louisiana on a B-52 whose crew thought they were transporting dummy warheads. As I recall, the aircraft and warheads were parked in the open, unguarded, for two days before the error was found.
This incident showed a worrisome degradation in the system of administrative controls in place for nuclear weapons. If you think administrative controls are just boring minutia, you might want to watch the movie "Doctor Strangelove" again.
But the Global Zero report addresses only our strategic weapons. We still have thousands of "tactical" nuclear weapons not only in Europe but also on ships and bases around the world. The smallest of these have nuclear yields on the same order as that of the bomb we dropped on Hiroshima in August, 1945.
Tactical nuclear weapons are not covered by any international arms control agreement. Poland and Norway have asked that NATO consider extending arms control to cover tactical nuclear weapons.
Not a bad idea.
Do we know where our nuclear weapons are?
Time To Undo The Euro?
My wife and I were living in Europe a decade ago when the Euro was introduced. Travel within the Eurozone was much more convenient with a single currency instead of having to convert after crossing every border. But I wondered how the inevitable differences in rates of economic growth would be accommodated.
The answer is now clear: not.
From the outset, some economists warned that the system wouldn't work. Here is an account of how Europe's political leaders ignored the warnings and chose to listen to economists who were more optimistic about the Euro.
The fall of the Euro still seems likely to begin in Greece. Greece's May 6 elections resolved nothing. It has proven impossible to form a government, so new elections will be held next month in hopes a government can be formed this time.
Will Greece default on its debts? It seems likely. Will Greece then leave the Euro zone and return to the drachma? It's really hard to see another realistic possibility.
Will such an event force the European Central Bank and, especially Germany, to rethink its policies of austerity?
Stay tuned.
The answer is now clear: not.
From the outset, some economists warned that the system wouldn't work. Here is an account of how Europe's political leaders ignored the warnings and chose to listen to economists who were more optimistic about the Euro.
The fall of the Euro still seems likely to begin in Greece. Greece's May 6 elections resolved nothing. It has proven impossible to form a government, so new elections will be held next month in hopes a government can be formed this time.
Will Greece default on its debts? It seems likely. Will Greece then leave the Euro zone and return to the drachma? It's really hard to see another realistic possibility.
Will such an event force the European Central Bank and, especially Germany, to rethink its policies of austerity?
Stay tuned.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
US Health Care Costs - An Analysis
Why does the US spend more on health care costs than other advanced countries? Another fair question might be, why are our health care outcomes generally worse?
The first question is not of trivial significance. Our health care costs range from 50% to 100% more expensive than other countries offering comparable technological quality of medicine. This is important to current debates on budget priorities, because most of the projected increase in federal budget expenditures over the next few decades results from projected increases in health care costs.
Economist Timothy Taylor has taken a close look at several studies of health care costs here. His conclusion:
"The question of why the U.S. spends more than 50% more per person on health care than the next highest countries (Switzerland and Netherlands), and more than double per person what many other countries spend, may never have a simple answer. Still, the main ingredients of an answer are becoming more clear. The U.S. spends vastly more on hospitalization and acute care, with a substantial share of that going to high-tech procedures like surgery and imaging. The U.S. does a poor job of managing chronic conditions, which then lead to episodes of costly hospitalization. The U.S. also seems to spend vastly more on administration and paperwork, with much of that related to credentialing, documenting, and billing--which is again a particular important issue in hospitals. Any honest effort to come to grips with high and rising U.S. health care costs will have to tackle these factors head-on."
The first question is not of trivial significance. Our health care costs range from 50% to 100% more expensive than other countries offering comparable technological quality of medicine. This is important to current debates on budget priorities, because most of the projected increase in federal budget expenditures over the next few decades results from projected increases in health care costs.
Economist Timothy Taylor has taken a close look at several studies of health care costs here. His conclusion:
"The question of why the U.S. spends more than 50% more per person on health care than the next highest countries (Switzerland and Netherlands), and more than double per person what many other countries spend, may never have a simple answer. Still, the main ingredients of an answer are becoming more clear. The U.S. spends vastly more on hospitalization and acute care, with a substantial share of that going to high-tech procedures like surgery and imaging. The U.S. does a poor job of managing chronic conditions, which then lead to episodes of costly hospitalization. The U.S. also seems to spend vastly more on administration and paperwork, with much of that related to credentialing, documenting, and billing--which is again a particular important issue in hospitals. Any honest effort to come to grips with high and rising U.S. health care costs will have to tackle these factors head-on."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
