| Thursday,
May 13, 2010
Ascension Thursday
Time to Smell the Roses?
The Los Angeles City Council has decided to boycott Arizona because
Arizona has new legislation allowing -- yea, mandating -- Arizona law
enforcement to enforce Federal immigration laws.
The Arizona law in essence says that illegal immigrants will not be
affected unless or until they legitimately come to the attention of the
police; which is what I had thought was a pretty broad consensus in the US.
It is not a series of raids with random stops and demands for "your papers,
please." Federal law already requires "papers" be carried by all legal
immigrants to the US. Those who don't are subject to arrest and possible
deportation. All states require "papers" of those driving a car, or for that
matter catching a flight on an airplane, and from time to time it is
proposed that one must show "papers" to board a train although we have not
yet got there.
The Arizona immigration law was either good or bad public relations:
which is not yet clear. Forcing people to take sides on a touchy issue, and
focusing attention on that issue, shows just how people feel. In Arizona the
new law has more than 66% approval, with majority approval even in many --
I've heard most -- Latino areas. In other states people are being forced to
make up their minds. Is enforcement of immigration laws "racist"? For that
matter, are borders and border control "racist"? California by initiative
attempted to restrict welfare benefits to citizens and legal immigrants, and
that was held unconstitutional (by a California court). It is not clear what
the sentiments of California are now. Los Angeles City Council and Mayor
Villars have made their positions clear, but the news has been rather silent
on poll data here, or perhaps I have missed it.
Meanwhile, the trillion dollar Euro-TARP that gives the United States a
share of Greek debt (we get to buy Greek bonds; the probability of those
ever being repaid at full value is rather low) continues. It's nice to think
that Americans who pay taxes get to support the Greek civil service
lifestyle of 14 month years (work for twelve months with 3 - 6 weeks off for
vacation, get paid for 14 months). Some tell me perhaps it's a good thing
for Americans to relax and not work so hard, take more time off, and get
used to the 10% unemployment that Europe enjoys. It's good for the Earth,
it's good for everyone. Slow down the pace of life, take time to smell the
roses, enjoy life.
========
During the Great Depression unemployment rates rose from 8% to nearly
25%, falling in two years to about 8%. In those days the "unemployed" meant
only those looking for work who couldn't find it; our today's 9% or so does
not include those who have given up and are taking time to smell the roses
or otherwise occupy their time. Note also that in the Great Depression
homemakers were not considered unemployed. These would mostly be women. An
unemployment category of "displaced homemaker" was added to the mix sometime
in the New Deal era; this mostly meant widows and divorcees, who no longer
had a home with income to keep.
The point here is that for most of human history, it was considered
proper for people mostly to live in families, with one member of the family
-- almost always women -- managing family affairs, keeping house, and
generally making a home. There was a time when "women's liberation" had the
goal that women would not be required to work outside the home. Those times
are largely forgotten. The early editions of Jacques Barzun's indispensable
Teacher in America has a chapter on the education of "marriageable
girls"; it was written in a time when it was assumed that most American
women went to college to earn "the Mrs. Degree". That was also a time when
divorce was generally considered a last resort. People were expected to live
in families, with one of the family members being the provider and the other
the manager.
That had a big effect on local government. Much of local government was
done by volunteers. Under Boss Ed Crump Memphis was a city of commissions
such as the City Beautiful commission, all positions filled by unpaid
volunteers, almost all middle to upper middle class women. It all seemed
natural enough to me when I was growing up. During the War, many women did
go to work, and things changed a lot. Everyone cheered the changes, despite
some nostalgia -- see the movie "Since You Went Away" -- and a brief period
in which it was thought that a "return to normalcy" with women as homemakers
was the way to go.
That's no longer the case. Last year more women than men graduated law
schools.
I point all this out because a shift in America to a system more like
Europe, with lower incomes, more leisure, and acceptance of 10% or more
unemployment as normal, has many implications, and I doubt we have come
close to understanding the long term consequences.
==============
The first last launch of Atlantis.
A reader notes:
“The Science Fiction
and Fantasy Writers of America, meanwhile, scheduled its Nebula Awards
conference in nearby Cocoa Beach to coincide with the launch.”
===========
"Thieves Flood Victim's Phone With Calls to Loot Bank
Accounts."
I can't explain this simply, but it's worth a read:
http://www.wired.com
/threatlevel/2010/05/telephony-dos/
DDoS while looters make off with your money. It's a
rough world out there.
Ed
As you imply, complicated. Worth reading for those with electronic
accounts worth looting. Interesting to the rest of us.
=================
Border War? In Legal Analysis, Attorney Says Google
Settlement Would Cause "Diplomatic Stress"
http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/
digital/copyright/article/43144-border-war-in-legal-
analysis-attorney-says-google-settlement-would-
cause-diplomatic-stress-.html
Dear Jerry:
This is why copyright law resists reform. It's a
global, rather than a national, set of laws.
Sincerely,
Francis Hamit
Thank you for pointing me at that. I was initially against the Google
Settlement -- I called it the Google Grab as most will recall -- but I have
changed my view. I believe it is necessary and import. The Settlement pays
authors a nominal fee for the insult -- that is, for copying their
copyrighted works without permission. It then allows copyright holders to
opt out of the rest of the agreement which establishes Google's right to
publish the works, collect money, and pay fees to authors.
The result will be to make available a large number of works still in
copyright whose owners are not known. Those works are vanishing now.
Google's goal, to make available as much as possible of the total written
work of mankind, is a worthy goal, and I see no other way to accomplish
that. I don't know another way they could have accomplished that. I believe
that Google and the Author's Guild have come to a reasonable and worthwhile
agreement, and I think it ought to be accepted. I understand that puts me in
conflict with a number of my fellow authors, and I don't take the position
lightly; but after giving it a lot of thought, I urge my readers and
colleagues to support this settlement.
The cost to authors is a couple of days of work laying claim to the
nominal compensation, and opting out of the provisions whereby Google can
offer the work for sale (and pay a stipulated fee to the copyright holder).
That is onerous but not fatal. The compensation is nominal but it is not
trivial. The result will be the preservation of a great number of orphaned
works.
Thursday TOP
Current Mail
|
