1. Response to So About That International Banking Conspiracy
This post should be actually be title "Why engineers should not do economics" or "Stock Market 101". Originally this looked like a very interesting piece. Some engineers in Europe were using an advanced network modeling algorithm on stock ownership ties: a statistical method I have considered using myself, and an area of research quite in line with my own. The implications of the study have such import as well. The world's corporations are controlled by the likes of Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Franklin Templeton...
...wait, Franklin Templeton? Investment banks controlling the world in a seedy web of lies makes sense... but an investment manager? The guys that hold retail brokerage accounts and issue mutual funds? I smell fish...
The problem is thus - They are looking where the shares of all the world's publicly held corporations sit, an interesting prospect. The problem with the Orbis Database they use is the problem with any public stock registry, you really just see where the stock is sitting. That can often be very different from who owns it. All these investment banks and managers show up because they have something in common - they have brokerages. And brokerages hold stock for other people. This is called holding stock in "street name". The physical stock certificate sits in vault at the brokerage - say UBS - and they mark in the books that Mr. Soros has 100,000 shares of Exxon mobile. It will show up that UBS holds the shares, but they don't own them or vote them. In the end, its a nifty statistical analysis that produces a pretty cool graphic, but if you wanted to know which financial institutions house most of the worlds shares, any broker or trader could have told you that. Good use of university resources.
2. Response to Life after Debt
If you view countries as corporations (which is typically a really bad analogy to make, but bear with me) this article actually makes a lot of sense. The US probably shouldn't be completely unleveraged - debt does in fact have its advantages. One of the primary advantages of debt to a company is that it commits excess cash to a purpose (paying off bondholders) and so managers are less likely to waste that money and endanger the company. The problem with the US, or any country, is that there is very little accountability for the public "managers" that decide how money gets spent. If money gets wasted - Oh well, not my money. This limits the disciplinary power of debt. Debt also provides cash which can be used in value added projects - again a problem for governments, because they tend not to add value. But some things they undertake do, such as infrastructure improvements. This means that governments, like corporations, have an "optimal" level of debt they should strive for. Ultimately, I think it would be very responsible if a political candidate actually addresses this. If someone came out and said, "We don't need to pay down the US debt, we just need to pay down any of it that isn't being invested in to fixed infrastructure" they will very much have impressed me.
21.10.11
Late Edition
1. Full Troop Withdrawal From Iraq
All politics aside, this is great news, so long as our contractors continue to train Iraqi military and police forces and the copious intelligence assets that we have undoubtedly put into play at all levels of the Iraqi government and military keep feeding us everything they have on Iran. The question is, will these troops come home only to find themselves refitted for Afghan deployment in another six months?
2. Ripple Effect of Gaddafi’s Death
For the most part I’m as cynical as they come. The jury is still out on whether the Arab Spring’s democratic ideal will or even can be realized in a region with little democratic tradition and sharp tribal and sectarian divides. It’s not looking good in Egypt where, rather than tearing out a regime root and branch, the opposition chased Mubarak from power while his military bureacracy was allowed to remain in control of the state. Tunisia looks more promising, though until the results of their elections it’s difficult to say if anything resembling a functioning government has been established to ratify a constitution. Now Libya, with the death of Gaddafi and the fall of Sirte, is under the total control of the disparate opposition groups that compose the NTC. Disarming the militias, locking up weapons and forming a national army and police force will be the first keys to ensuring a democratic process free of political violence can even take place. Until those things are undertaken, however, much is up in the air. But occasionally the cynic in me is overtaken by the Jeffersonian revolutionary, and I can’t help but cheer when a dictator is pulled out of a sewer drain and brought to rough justice by the people he oppressed with impunity for nearly half a century. I become even more thrilled when I hear the opposition movements in Syria and Yemen warning their authoritarian regimes to take a good long look: they’re next. Sic semper tyrannus, indeed. No longer just the motto of the State of Virginia, but the impetus of a broad democratic movement in a land with a history that ought to make such a phenomenon impossible. While it’s entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that all of these movements may wind up more closely resembling the French and Iranian Revolutions than the American, for the time being I continue to quietly root for these democratic opposition movements, tempering my enthusiasm with the healthy and cynical axiom that liberty is not, in fact, inevitable, and that its birth is one of arduous labor, frequent violence, and chaos.
3. “Life After Debt”
This is so depressing to read given our current state of decrepitude. It’s also disturbing and horrific how reliant our country is upon debt.
All politics aside, this is great news, so long as our contractors continue to train Iraqi military and police forces and the copious intelligence assets that we have undoubtedly put into play at all levels of the Iraqi government and military keep feeding us everything they have on Iran. The question is, will these troops come home only to find themselves refitted for Afghan deployment in another six months?
2. Ripple Effect of Gaddafi’s Death
For the most part I’m as cynical as they come. The jury is still out on whether the Arab Spring’s democratic ideal will or even can be realized in a region with little democratic tradition and sharp tribal and sectarian divides. It’s not looking good in Egypt where, rather than tearing out a regime root and branch, the opposition chased Mubarak from power while his military bureacracy was allowed to remain in control of the state. Tunisia looks more promising, though until the results of their elections it’s difficult to say if anything resembling a functioning government has been established to ratify a constitution. Now Libya, with the death of Gaddafi and the fall of Sirte, is under the total control of the disparate opposition groups that compose the NTC. Disarming the militias, locking up weapons and forming a national army and police force will be the first keys to ensuring a democratic process free of political violence can even take place. Until those things are undertaken, however, much is up in the air. But occasionally the cynic in me is overtaken by the Jeffersonian revolutionary, and I can’t help but cheer when a dictator is pulled out of a sewer drain and brought to rough justice by the people he oppressed with impunity for nearly half a century. I become even more thrilled when I hear the opposition movements in Syria and Yemen warning their authoritarian regimes to take a good long look: they’re next. Sic semper tyrannus, indeed. No longer just the motto of the State of Virginia, but the impetus of a broad democratic movement in a land with a history that ought to make such a phenomenon impossible. While it’s entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that all of these movements may wind up more closely resembling the French and Iranian Revolutions than the American, for the time being I continue to quietly root for these democratic opposition movements, tempering my enthusiasm with the healthy and cynical axiom that liberty is not, in fact, inevitable, and that its birth is one of arduous labor, frequent violence, and chaos.
3. “Life After Debt”
This is so depressing to read given our current state of decrepitude. It’s also disturbing and horrific how reliant our country is upon debt.
Early Edition
1. Experience and the Presidency
An article excoriating Obama’s lack of leadership experience as the underlying factor in his presidency’s failure. It also should serve as a reminder that the challenger he faces in 2012 needs to have relevant leadership experience combined with a demonstrable mastery of the issues confronting the next president (foreign policy, economy and budget). A lot of people would interpret this as necessarily a Washington insider, but this is absolutely not the case. There are many members of Congress that have made a career opposing establishment culture, and there are many governors across the country whose entire agenda has been driven by opposition to Washington and the protection of their state’s interest. All that to say, the whole Tea Party 2010 phenomenon was great; inexperienced newcomers for whom politics is merely the expression of concerned citizenry and not a career is exactly what the House of Respresentatives is all about. But when we start talking about the presidency, it’s important for those who oppose Obama on the grounds that he is a radical neophyte to avoid falling into the hypocritical trap of pushing an equally bumbling novice into his place on the grounds of ideological purity.
2. Libya
There’s a lot of talk of Libya being a vindication of President Obama’s “foreign policy” (I’m frankly not sure if President Obama has a foreign policy, or if he’s outsourced it all to Secretary Clinton). I do have to say that, in broad strokes, I think President Obama got Libya right (though his execution was sloppy and downright foolish in certain respects). Before I get drowned out by the inevitable caterwauling, what I mean by that is that he had the sense/boldness to pursue a policy in which the United States diffused responsibility for military action in an Arab nation among other participants (including Arabs) and played a role of, at best, a first among equals. Whether or not President Obama did this out of courage is debatable, but the move itself was politically courageous in that it defied the jingoistic notion parroted by the neocons that America must lead whatever fight it decides to pursue (we do not; we should merely be the best fighter among many for reasons of national pride). If the United States makes a conscious decision to rollback the neocon nation-building agenda that’s crippled our ability to credibly exercise our foreign policy, then adventures like the one in Libya become what they used to be only two decades ago: drop in the bucket investments that yield huge dividends for minimal costs. Here is a situation where the Alliance and the United Nations responded to the direct and explicit call of oppressed peoples representing a broad opposition movement to assist them in establishing a pluralistic government, pledged to pay us back for our involvement, and did not require the deployment of conventional ground forces on our part or an indefinite commitment. The total cost to date has been roughly $2 billion, all of which could be paid back by the Libyan NTC if Gaddafi’s frozen assets (roughly $32 billion) are unfrozen and turned over to the NTC, minus our cut. I don’t want this to turn into a full-blown article about the merits of the Libyan operation, I imagine the other aspects of my views of its merits will be borne out in ensuing commentary.
3. “Clovis First” Officially Dead
And neolithic human civilization, with all its mastadon, giant-sloth and predatory flightless bird hunting, is badass.
4. Cain “Clarifies” His Pro-Life Stance
So it seems Cain was simply trying to deflect Piers Morgan’s questions about the extremity of his anti-abortion views and wasn’t putting forward a nuanced, “hands off” approach to abortion with respect to the federal government. Fail. Where I fault Cain is that, despite his reputation for plain-spokenness, he seems too often to try to wriggle out of difficult questions with misdirection (how often have you heard him give a quick, non-answer and then quickly say “Now, secondly…” and move onto another completely unrelated statement). He also sometimes doesn't seem to grasp the implications of his answers or statements to the public's perception of his agenda. The overall impression one gets from these repeated gaffes (he got roasted in the last debate for not only saying in an interview that he could see himself offering a transfer of Gitmo prisoners for a captured American soldier, but his bumbling attempts to completely disown the statement) is that there is either no cohesive policy underlining his campaign or that he is far too unprepared for these interviews in terms of mastering the issues. Bottom line is, while I tried to give him a chance, Herman Cain does not seem to deserve his front-runner spot.
An article excoriating Obama’s lack of leadership experience as the underlying factor in his presidency’s failure. It also should serve as a reminder that the challenger he faces in 2012 needs to have relevant leadership experience combined with a demonstrable mastery of the issues confronting the next president (foreign policy, economy and budget). A lot of people would interpret this as necessarily a Washington insider, but this is absolutely not the case. There are many members of Congress that have made a career opposing establishment culture, and there are many governors across the country whose entire agenda has been driven by opposition to Washington and the protection of their state’s interest. All that to say, the whole Tea Party 2010 phenomenon was great; inexperienced newcomers for whom politics is merely the expression of concerned citizenry and not a career is exactly what the House of Respresentatives is all about. But when we start talking about the presidency, it’s important for those who oppose Obama on the grounds that he is a radical neophyte to avoid falling into the hypocritical trap of pushing an equally bumbling novice into his place on the grounds of ideological purity.
2. Libya
There’s a lot of talk of Libya being a vindication of President Obama’s “foreign policy” (I’m frankly not sure if President Obama has a foreign policy, or if he’s outsourced it all to Secretary Clinton). I do have to say that, in broad strokes, I think President Obama got Libya right (though his execution was sloppy and downright foolish in certain respects). Before I get drowned out by the inevitable caterwauling, what I mean by that is that he had the sense/boldness to pursue a policy in which the United States diffused responsibility for military action in an Arab nation among other participants (including Arabs) and played a role of, at best, a first among equals. Whether or not President Obama did this out of courage is debatable, but the move itself was politically courageous in that it defied the jingoistic notion parroted by the neocons that America must lead whatever fight it decides to pursue (we do not; we should merely be the best fighter among many for reasons of national pride). If the United States makes a conscious decision to rollback the neocon nation-building agenda that’s crippled our ability to credibly exercise our foreign policy, then adventures like the one in Libya become what they used to be only two decades ago: drop in the bucket investments that yield huge dividends for minimal costs. Here is a situation where the Alliance and the United Nations responded to the direct and explicit call of oppressed peoples representing a broad opposition movement to assist them in establishing a pluralistic government, pledged to pay us back for our involvement, and did not require the deployment of conventional ground forces on our part or an indefinite commitment. The total cost to date has been roughly $2 billion, all of which could be paid back by the Libyan NTC if Gaddafi’s frozen assets (roughly $32 billion) are unfrozen and turned over to the NTC, minus our cut. I don’t want this to turn into a full-blown article about the merits of the Libyan operation, I imagine the other aspects of my views of its merits will be borne out in ensuing commentary.
3. “Clovis First” Officially Dead
And neolithic human civilization, with all its mastadon, giant-sloth and predatory flightless bird hunting, is badass.
4. Cain “Clarifies” His Pro-Life Stance
So it seems Cain was simply trying to deflect Piers Morgan’s questions about the extremity of his anti-abortion views and wasn’t putting forward a nuanced, “hands off” approach to abortion with respect to the federal government. Fail. Where I fault Cain is that, despite his reputation for plain-spokenness, he seems too often to try to wriggle out of difficult questions with misdirection (how often have you heard him give a quick, non-answer and then quickly say “Now, secondly…” and move onto another completely unrelated statement). He also sometimes doesn't seem to grasp the implications of his answers or statements to the public's perception of his agenda. The overall impression one gets from these repeated gaffes (he got roasted in the last debate for not only saying in an interview that he could see himself offering a transfer of Gitmo prisoners for a captured American soldier, but his bumbling attempts to completely disown the statement) is that there is either no cohesive policy underlining his campaign or that he is far too unprepared for these interviews in terms of mastering the issues. Bottom line is, while I tried to give him a chance, Herman Cain does not seem to deserve his front-runner spot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)