| Thursday,
March 30, 2006 Subject: Sorry legislation
Hi Jerry.
It will soon be possible to say "sorry" in British
Columbia without necessarily admitting liability:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/
RTGAM.20060329.wxbcapology29/BNStory/National/home
Cheers,
Mike Casey
Now that has a bunch of implications....
Subject: It happened in Wales, too
Over 600 years of Welsh military tradition has come to
an end on St David's Day with the merger of two famous Welsh regiments.
The names Royal Welch Fusiliers and The Royal Regiment
of Wales were consigned to history with the birth of the new regiment, The
Royal Welsh.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4760102.stm
Also sad.
Steven
===========
Subject: Ebook interest, copy protection,
pricing
Dr. Pournelle,
I am interested in your readers, all of them. I
however would not be interested in a document that had my credit card number
embedded in any fashion, translucent, crosswise, diagonal, or in a header or
footer, as suggested by your correspondent Phil. It would certainly deter
piracy, as it would deter an original purchase.
For example, I can't possibly pirate anything
published by Sony as I will not buy their original products. The same goes
for any game "protected" (infected) by the starforce crippleware scheme. I
suppose in my case the sony rootkits and starforce are 100% effective
anti-piracy deterrents as I would threaten bodily harm against anyone
attempting to simply place any sony or starforce product NEAR my computer,
let alone using my computer to copy it...
Back on topic, just be careful about implementing
anti-piracy solutions that would inhibit sales, especially at the reasonable
prices you have been discussing. Regarding the prices you have mentioned, I
personally would have picked somewhere around $5 ($4.99?) because for some
reason a $10 bill is more emotionally significant than a $5 bill and at your
price point I'd have to break a $10, which makes buying one of your books at
$7.95 "real money". But that's just me, and thank goodness I'm a subscriber
and could buy for $4.95. I'm one of those people who will walk a mile to
find a coke machine selling cans for 50 cents or do without, even if a
nearby alternative is merely 55 cents... I used to buy paperbacks at $4.95
and since they've exceeded $5 everywhere, I've found myself buying fewer
paperbacks because anything over $5 is "real" money, subject to thoughtful
consideration. If I don't NEED it it won't be bought and as a result, I have
absolutely no idea who today's good SciFi/Fantasy writers are because to
find out I'd have to buy a bunch of books for more than $5 each.
I even cringe whenever I buy a fast food meal for over
$5.
It's stupid, but that's the way it is. I'll happily
buy $1,200 in camera gear because I've done 6 months of research before
buying, and then I'll buy a $4.49 burger meal instead of the $5.49 meal
based on price alone.
Sean Long
Oh, I'd never take the trouble to put any
"watermark" other than one pointing to me on anything. I certainly wouldn't
do anything so drastic as put someone else's credit card number anywhere.
I'll think on pricing; my main purpose at
the moment is to recover a couple of thousand dollars invested in ISBN
numbers and editorial costs. I never thought I'd get rich off this, except
that if we can get some quality reading going on the country will be a lot
richer and better to live in. (And giving them away isn't an option: few
people value what's free. Alas.)
==========
Subject: IQ and Nationality
Following up the earlier email from Brad, the original
article about IQs across Europe was in The Times on Monday, the researcher
is from the University of Ulster.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2105519,00.html
The research not only compares the IQs between
countries but within countries - those from the capital apparently come out
smarter.
It is interesting that in the week we have had the
crass stupidity in Leeds, with a lecturer suspended for expressing unpopular
views, this research has attracted almost no comment. I wonder what would
have happened if he had compared IQs between the UK and Nigeria or Zimbabwe?
It appears it is alright to say there are differences between two groups of
whites but not between black and white or - as it notes in the article -
between men and women.
Cheers,
Alasdair Urquhart
===============
A Discussion of
Murray's Plan to Replace Welfare
First:
Charles Murray interview
http://www.tcsdaily.com/Article.aspx?id=032806A
-- Roland Dobbins
Charles Murray's IN OUR HANDS is a
brilliant book. This discussion comes from a closed discussion group; you'd
recognize the names of some of the participants, but the rules don't allow
me to quote them by name.
I actually think this plan is brilliant. I'm sure
Murray has done the calculations to show that current spending (including
opportunity costs imposed by taxation induced deadweights and so on) is
north of $10k per person.
Moreover, if the low IQ squander their money...great!
They will no longer have the moral club to ask us for more. It will be
visible and in plain sight. Everyone can -- and *WILL* -- ask "what did you
do with your $10000"?
Unless the answer is "I spent it on my dying grandma",
the bottomless well of abstract "sympathy" for the underclass -- which in
general does not survive an encounter with the *real* underclass -- will dry
up.
The proposal, if passed, subtly offers a brilliant
rhetorical club, a shared frame of reference that will push the debate
forward. When *everyone* agrees on something (e.g. "Nazis bad"), that is
when you get a powerful secular offset in society.
If everyone agrees "you should have spent your $10k
intelligently", then the screwups of the dumb become far more obvious.
Equalize environment and heredity becomes dominant. Most importantly, most
liberal excuses re: opportunity etc. are undercut. All in all...it's
brilliant, IMO -- *if* it could be accompanied by slashing all
redistributive programs entirely.
If not, it would be a disaster.
G
==
> Moreover, if the low IQ squander their money...great! They will no
> longer have the moral club to ask us for more. It will be visible and
> in plain sight. Everyone can -- and *WILL* -- ask "what did you do
> with your $10000"?
You confuse me. It makes no sense to on the one
hand, think that genetics predestine people for suffering, and on the hand
feel that justice has been done when that suffering is allowed to happen. In
fact it's pretty monstrous.
Murray's plan makes no sense because it is both
socialism, and through the inevitable mismanagement of funds that will occur
with the genetic underclass, *ineffective* socialism (as you have just
admitted). Redistribution should, if it is going to happen, work to mitigate
the worst aspects of inequality. Good socialism would, in theory, narrow
most of the divide between the middleclass and underclass, by directing its
largesse at the most unfortunate members of society. (A Rawlsian sentiment
that makes even more sense if you think merits are the unearned luck of the
genetic draw) Murray's plan on the other hand just sounds like it will
mostly benefit the middleclass, narrowing the gap between the middle and the
top, and leaving those at the bottom in an even more degraded and unequal
state.
How is that fair or desirable? It doesn't even
make sense. People at the bottom are there because they couldn't take
responsibility in the first place, giving them *more* isn't going to help
them, only underline their patheticness. It's a waste of the tons of money
we are giving them, and in the end is not solving the problem it should be
solving, because the underclass will be just as vulnerable and unprotected.
The result, I guarantee you, will be calls for even *more* socialism, not
simply the acquiescence to suffering that you appear to want.
Instead of letting the underclass (and to a
certain extent the middleclass) squander real money, why not manage it for
them competently, so that they can actually benefit from it? This is what
behavioral economics is telling us makes the most sense:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=405940
JM
==
No, the socialists would just claim that $10,000 isn't
much money and they would be right. Look, how can these poor folks buy
medical insurance, food, and rent with $10000 per year? Depending on their
age they could be spending $200 or $300 per month on medical insurance and
stll have a few thousand dollar deductible and no insurance for buying
drugs. So they might spend a third or more of their money on medical
expenses.
Plus, when they showed up at emergency wards the
public would still insist that they be treated.
Also, what about the schizophrenics, quadraplegics,
and other severely disabled?
Even if Murray's plan could get implemented (and it
can't) the result would be a public calling for more social spending to deal
with all the stuff it would not address. People do not want to see
suffering. They would not say "great" as you do. The abstract sympathy puts
a lot of Democrats into Congress.
R
==
The Welfare State is here to stay, especially
since the LHS tail of the Bell Curve does not show much immediate prospect
of getting shorter.
A good civics policy is to make the Welfare
state more conservative, rather than "constructive". That is, transfer
payments should be made more conditional on community-spirited behaviour and
personal propriety.
Mutual Obligation. Paternalism.
This is both politically popular and policy
practical.
JS
==
> Instead of letting the underclass (and to a certain extent the
> middleclass) squander real money, why not manage it for them
> competently, so that they can actually benefit from it
I think my point is that nothing can really be done
for them. I have become more and more cynical about any attempts to "help"
the poor. Not to say that one should stand in their way, but rather that
what holds true for countries is true for individuals -- no one gets rich
off welfare or foreign aid.
Insofar as this kind of payment was a "one and done",
it would mean spending less (net) on welfare. By concentrating the payment
economically and -- more importantly -- psychologically rather than
diffusing it over a million different programs, you underline their
incompetence with $.
The reason it is important to prove that the poor are
simply incompetent rather than unfortunate and/or victims is that it would
be the beginning of a mature societal conversation about income inequality.
Like I said to Ikram, there is a world of difference between:
"it's your fault I'm poor"
vs.
"it's not my fault I'm dumb"
The former is an angry accusation which demands
recompense; the latter is a sad request for charity. BIG difference in terms
of social consequences.
Once you admit the poor are "victims", the game is up.
But by magnifying their failure with a "standardized test" of financial
decisionmaking, you can actually prove to the masses -- without regression
analysis or statistics -- that the poor will mismanage whatever is given to
them.
Similarly, I would be for slavery reparations if that
meant a complete and immediate end to all affirmative action programs. It
wouldn't in practice, of course, which is why I oppose it.
On this particular issue, all of you make good points
about the likelihood of this policy being implemented with Lee Kuan Yew
style efficiency in the US. If implemented at all it would be on top of the
alphabet soup of existing agencies, which would be exactly
counterproductive. Again people would hear from a Murray book only what they
wanted to hear ("free money" in this case).
Perhaps we have now come to a point where it is
utopian to dream of abolishing most governmental transfer payments (medicare,
etc.) in favor of a direct cash payment. Ah well...then again, it was
utopian 30-40 years ago to talk about free market economics, and utopian
today to talk about genetic engineering...
G
And that's a lot to think about.
==============
A contribution to
the immigration discussion:
Subject: Notes toward an essay on illegal immigration
Jerry On this I must say your education is sorely
lacking. I have worked in Gas Stations, garages and small manufacturing
since the mid 50s when I was in high school. At that time almost everybody
in school had some kind of a dirty hands apprentice job except for the
teachers pets that were on a collage track. You can not get in today’s world
young people either white or black to work in a shop environment, it will
just not happen except for a very small minority.
Most if not all auto mechanics and station help today
are immigrants because our young people will not learn the jobs. Most if not
all fast food and mini mart employees are immigrants for the same reason.
Most if not all truck drivers, machinists, machine operators and maintenance
people are immigrants. Why, because our schools do not teach basic job
skills any longer, they assume all are going to collage and if the teacher
does not think the student is suitable or qualified for collage the student
is pressured by teachers and councilors to drop out. I personally have not
seen an American born white or black come to the door of any company where
real work is involved and apply for a job. We have tried to hire them and as
soon as they see machines working or in some cases hear them they are gone.
What do they say as they are leaving, "I am not going
to do beaner work for any price, I will not demean myself." We have hired
some in shipping and receiving or inspection but they quit after a few weeks
because they feel such dirty hands on labor is beneath their dignity to
perform, they deserve better working conditions and money. Our immigrant
workers pay through withholding all the same taxes as any other worker in
this country pays and the illegal ones do not get refunds because they can
not file for one so they end up paying more taxes than those that are legal
do.
Do not blame the immigrants for taking jobs that our
young aristocrats would not take and perform at any price because they do
not wish to get their fastidious hands a little bit dirty. Get the facts man
and not from the NY Times or CBS broadcasting. Most small business in this
country would be out of business if it were not for immigrant labor from all
over the world and yes some of it might be illegal but they get paid the
same because we can not tell the difference. Do not put the immigrants down
Jerry because our industry at all levels would grind to a screeching halt
without them, period!!
-- James Early Long Beach, CA
A proud decendent of Dutch, Irish, Scotch and Welsh
ancestors who worked and died to make this country strong and keep ti free.
A competent and self-confident person is incapable of
jealousy in anything. Jealousy is invariably a symptom of neurotic
insecurity. Robert A. Heinlein
Considering how much I have written about
the deficiencies of our school system, particularly with regard to no longer
teaching basic skills, I would not have thought my education so lacking as
to find anything new in this letter.
This letter paints a lovely picture of a
factory with steady work, good wages, taxes withheld including social
security, and no American takers. I suspect that is not a highly usual
situation.
=
Dear Senator
I work in jails in New Jersey, so I know that young
men who are trying to find entry level jobs at a decent wage in this state
cannot do so because of competition from illegal aliens who bid down their
wages.
I have watched jobs that used to be done by skilled
union tradesmen being done by illegal aliens. It takes them a lot longer,
but their labor is so cheap that non-union contractors can out-compete union
contractors. This saddens me because I have belonged to labor unions.
In sum, this new push in the Senate to legalize
illegal aliens will betray the core constituents of the Democratic Party.
I am fully aware that sending illegals home will
separate some parents from their children. My grandparents came here in
1910, never to see their parents again. The same is true for my wife. These
days, with airline travel and inexpensive-even free-international telephone
service, such separation is not nearly as bad as it was in decades past.
I know that many farmers and growers depend on foreign
workers. Maybe it is time that they began to automate their operations the
way the grain farmers did 150 years ago. We have far better technology now,
and maybe Americans would get factory work making the equipment.
Granting amnesty in the 1980's only encouraged more to
come here. When Bush first mentioned an amnesty, the influx of illegals
surged. If you forgive our current crop, more will come.
Build a wall. Send the illegals home.
Yours truly,
Ed
============
"Daddy, I was a Jew today."
http://www.local6.com/news/8345157/detail.html
- Roland Dobbins
==========
Archaeologist links palace to legendary Ajax.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12080932/
- Roland Dobbins
Fascinating. This would be Ajax the
Greater, not the Lesser Ajax who defied the lightning and liked to kill
people. Astonishing how often we find hints of the truth of old legends.
TOP
CURRENT
VIEW Thursday |
