tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post1491833553434230374..comments2024-03-27T23:12:08.917-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: A cantankerous political climax (at last).David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-10145760651359548592016-10-30T17:28:17.761-07:002016-10-30T17:28:17.761-07:00Not sure what's wrong with me. That was meant...Not sure what's wrong with me. That was meant for the more recent post.<br /><br />Keep onward<br /><br />...<br />onward!LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-71078444345487851742016-10-30T17:27:04.210-07:002016-10-30T17:27:04.210-07:00@Paul SB,
I'm not saying I don't care if ...@Paul SB,<br /><br />I'm not saying I don't <b>care</b> if the Cubs win. I'm just saying that winning the World Series is a second thing to root for--that the National League championship was also a big deal, and that's in the bag already, no matter what happens tonight.<br /><br />Also, you were sounding as if the series was lost already, and that's not the case.<br /><br />No, I don't still have those old baseball cards. I also don't keep my old comics in mint or near-mint condition. I read them. So no retirement yet. :)<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35112297655495879962016-10-29T13:23:27.225-07:002016-10-29T13:23:27.225-07:00onward
onwardonward<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-42108976300083826442016-10-29T13:23:18.275-07:002016-10-29T13:23:18.275-07:00In order to push their false equivalence insanity,...In order to push their false equivalence insanity, the confeds have to call ankle high molehills the same as Everest-high mountains. <br /><br />Clinton's extremely minor and utterly harm free slightly-doofus email errors outweigh GW Bush erasing 22 MILLION emails to block investigation of his firing 8 federal prosecutors who were plumbing Bush-Cheney thefts of billions. Like the 49 billion in raw cash Cheney sent on pallets to Baghdad, that "vanished" and the gopper committees never held a single hearing.<br /><br />Read that over again locumranch. Your side is insane and so are you, if you can envision equivalence.<br /><br />OUTCOMES are good under dems and awful under goppers. Your armwave incantations do not change that. Nor the fact that your cult wages war on every profession that actually knows stuff.<br /><br />All you can do is make up stories that all smart people who know stuff are in a (completely illogical and counterfactual) monolithic conspiracy against "real" people like you, who are NOT smart and do not know stuff.<br /><br />Okay, I confess. It's true. We are conspiring to save our nation and species.<br /><br />From you.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-3415788458686828212016-10-29T13:20:59.818-07:002016-10-29T13:20:59.818-07:00Paul SB: "Sexual scandals have been used to r...Paul SB: <i>"Sexual scandals have been used to ruin political opponents for as long as leaders have been elected...anyone know of any such scandals from The Roman Republic, Classical Athens, or any of the little Italian republics?"</i><br />My guess is that the historians of the day steered clear of such scandals. We have David & Bathsheba, but that was probably written down centuries after it occurred (if it ever occurred); so too with Helen of Troy. It wasn't easy to scribe history contemporaneously, and the Romans were the first in the West to recognize how useful doing so could be for propaganda: Augustus Caesar deployed morality as a tool to purge leaders he opposed and cement his empire: many have followed suit. I would guess scandal was used in a low-literate era mainly to challenge a legacy post facto, rather than to challenge an existing leader's place.<br /><br /><i>How are you for weekends? My weekdays are usually wiped out by work and family.</i><br />Weekends are usually better. I've been staying in Anaheim rather than Glendora lately on account of some repairs being done to my apartment, but will be around next weekend. How about Saturday, 11 am, at the yogurt place on Lone Hill & Route 66 (the Stater Bro's strip mall)?donzelionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05991849781932619746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-33659864881328468692016-10-29T13:10:44.988-07:002016-10-29T13:10:44.988-07:00@locumranch
I never can understand how Republican...@locumranch<br /><br />I never can understand how Republicans always try to use the false equivalence argument, over and over. If your guy is guilty of murder and the other guy is guilty of jaywalking, they are not the same thing.<br />Weiner, husband of an aide to Hillary, is accused of sexually inappropriate behaviour with a 15 year old. Somehow this makes Hillary, who had nothing to do with that, the exact same as Trump, who is facing one and possibly two civil suits alleging child rape.<br />How can you possibly equate the two. Two level of ethical and intellectual degradation do you have to reach before you can conclude that one annuls the other and sets the candidates as equals.<br />Nor is it just whether your 2016 candidate is involved in kiddy-diddling or not (what a miserable year this is!); it's pretty much on every level. Republicans like to complain that Hillary failed at foreign policy, forgetting to mention they pretty much destroyed the middle east and alienated Russia. And Trump is the one who thinks all these potential combatants in the ME or east Asia should all have nukes. He also thinks if we have nukes, we should use them.<br />Yes, Hillary is a hawk, and no, I don't like that. But she's a sane hawk--Trump is not.<br />Zepp Jamiesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03024670772812706971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-23524777451983123212016-10-29T13:10:09.873-07:002016-10-29T13:10:09.873-07:00LarryHart: Hamilton accused Jefferson of sleeping ...LarryHart: Hamilton accused Jefferson of sleeping with Sally Hemings (who was one of his slaves) <i>"...I'll bet there were plenty of southern slave-owners who thought "So? Doesn't everybody do that?"</i><br />Doubtless correct, but also doubtless they preferred it be kept under wraps. <br /><br /><i>"...back then, making that sort of accusation would have reflected as badly on Hamilton as it did on Jefferson."</i><br />Indeed, and hence when Burr shot Hamilton, many applauded. As now, demonizing an "enemy" and expressing alienation 'trumped' decency (and indeed, the Adams/Hamilton approach to national defense MIGHT have repelled the British in the War of 1812 - Jefferson's 'yeoman force' was a laughingstock until the one battle in which it was supported by Cajun Orleaners who knew how to fight). Such a tragic waste.<br /><br /><i>"But that just puts them in the same category as the ones who "Don't like it when either party runs up the deficit," but only makes that statement when a Democrat is in power."</i><br />Indeed. If they were really bothered by the deficit, they'd have voted for Al Gore and continued the policy of paying it all down and then building up the social security trust fund. <br /><br /><i>"...if they say to "lock up EVERYONE in government", they're only saying that now."</i><br />The bitter outrage was present even when Bush Jr. was in power, but it was redirected, circus-like, at the "war on Christmas" and the "culture war" and the "save Terri Schiavo" movements. They had no shortage of targets to attack (an entire phantom axis of evil). But the core was always the same: let the rich get phenomenally richer, feel anger at anyone or anything suggesting a problem, attack attack attack the declining civilization - and do nothing as a financial storm brews except HOPE that your servants are fast enough to save your fortune at 5 seconds to midnight before the clock strikes.<br /><br />Our friend Locum feels comfort in his bitterness, as is his right. But the net effect of cynical bitterness is to shut down reason itself, replace it with habit of obsessive dogma - to think in terms of 'here are all my enemies, how do I hate them, let me count the ways - once more, and then again after that' - rather than to look at real problems in the real world and try to fix them. <br /><br />Scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs - creators of all types cannot approach life that way while contributing anything of merit. So it went with the Hamilton haters, who demonized him for decades without ever acknowledging anything good that he contributed. So it can go with any of us who give way to hate.donzelionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05991849781932619746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-22264062914431051802016-10-29T12:37:04.913-07:002016-10-29T12:37:04.913-07:00It is hard to tell which of two groups is more des...<br /><br />It is hard to tell which of two groups is more despicable: The first group of powerful Dracula-like 'Predators' that prey upon the innocent; or, the second group of Renfield-like Enablers that procure & pimp for those predatory monsters out of perverted self-interest.<br /><br />We all agree that D. Hastert, D. Trump & B. Clinton belong to the first group of predators, the only thing WORSE being those individuals who enable, lure & procure for those monsters.<br /><br />That said, it's nice to H. Clinton & her top aid hoisted on their own petard-like Weiner.<br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-17933398329823001792016-10-29T12:29:21.290-07:002016-10-29T12:29:21.290-07:00Jumper,
You're right about that, though in mo...Jumper,<br /><br />You're right about that, though in most cases the community colleges serve the function of Arbeitschulen, but the problem is still our prestige system. Employers are more likely to hire people with a degree from a 4-year than anything else, even if a certificate from a CC is exactly what is called for.Paul SBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-18428079365852766912016-10-29T12:26:11.301-07:002016-10-29T12:26:11.301-07:00donzelion:
Hamilton accused Jefferson of sleeping...donzelion:<br /><i><br />Hamilton accused Jefferson of sleeping with Sally Hemings (who was one of his slaves)<br /></i><br /><br />Not to disagree with you, but I'll bet there were plenty of southern slave-owners who thought "So? Doesn't everybody do that?" It also seems to me that, back then, making that sort of accusation would have reflected as badly on Hamilton as it did on Jefferson.<br /><br /><i><br />"So if you're not going to complain about what they did, it's awfully darned hypocritical to condemn Hillary." A subtle difference, maybe, but I think a good one."<br /><br />Concur. But I think it's problematic in that many of the "lock her up!" chanters would just as quickly lock up EVERYONE in government (guilty or innocent) simply to express their nebulous alienation.<br /></i><br /><br />But that just puts them in the same category as the ones who "Don't like it when <b>either</b> party runs up the deficit," but only makes that statement when a Democrat is in power. Likewise, if they say to "lock up EVERYONE in government", they're only saying that now.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-47059050010478418182016-10-29T12:22:31.103-07:002016-10-29T12:22:31.103-07:00Donzelion,
Sexual scandals have been used to rui...Donzelion,<br /><br />Sexual scandals have been used to ruin political opponents for as long as leaders have been elected. When Ken Starr first went after Uncle Bill, I referred to it as "Parnelling" the President. Charles Stewart Parnell had the best chance of anyone to bring peace to Ireland back in the 19th C., but for an affair that ended his career. Anyone know of any such scandals from The Roman Republic, Classical Athens, or any of the little Italian republics? My history brain is out of order at the moment. I was rather confused that Clinton was impeached and yet continued to serve as president, while Nixon resigned to avoid impeachment.<br /><br />Bummer about Halloween. How are you for weekends? My weekdays are usually wiped out by work and family.<br />Paul SBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-19973003390788529082016-10-29T11:01:15.300-07:002016-10-29T11:01:15.300-07:00LarryHart: "It's not that [Bill Clinton] ...LarryHart: <i>"It's not that [Bill Clinton] did something criminal with "that woman"--just that it was unseemly to have such goings on in the public discourse. In an earlier age, the mere accusation would have driven Bill to resign before the impeachment hearings."</i><br /><br />Ahem, sexual exploits have been fair targets in American politics from the earliest ages of our country - starting from Hamilton's accusation of Jefferson in a newspaper re sleeping with 'one of his slaves' in an earlier age, Hamilton accused Jefferson of sleeping with Sally Hemings (who was one of his slaves) (I neglected to mention that as a key aspect of the rift between Madison, who loved Jefferson like a big brother, and Hamilton.)<br /><br />Difference is that at the end of the day, Hamilton loved America, as did Jefferson and Madison. Trump loves Trump. We have absolutely no evidence of any love for America, and on every position he now advocates, he's flip-flopped back and forth whenever it served his interest. <br /><br /><i>"Remember, e-mail was a fairly new thing during the Clinton and then Bush administrations."</i><br />Actually, it was Crackberry that was new, and not endorsed by many government offices for a variety of reasons (e.g., rules against entrusting secure U.S. messages to a Canadian company's encryption system) - and that prompted bureaucrats to set up their own servers. They added email to crackberry capabilities more to simplify their lives than anything else.<br /><br /><i>"So if you're not going to complain about what they did, it's awfully darned hypocritical to condemn Hillary." A subtle difference, maybe, but I think a good one."</i><br />Concur. But I think it's problematic in that many of the "lock her up!" chanters would just as quickly lock up EVERYONE in government (guilty or innocent) simply to express their nebulous alienation.donzelionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05991849781932619746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-55341485338426586352016-10-29T10:45:21.244-07:002016-10-29T10:45:21.244-07:00Paul SB: This year, I'll probably be in Anahei...Paul SB: This year, I'll probably be in Anaheim at the girlfriend's house, handing out candy and working on a brief that's due Nov 1 (indeed, usually I come here to take breaks from that sort of writing). Halloween's not likely to work, but perhaps later this week?donzelionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05991849781932619746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25641044461289385592016-10-29T10:25:32.527-07:002016-10-29T10:25:32.527-07:00I think in the USA the "trade schools" h...I think in the USA the "trade schools" hide in the university setting. My good impression of NC State just keeps rising. Their materials research is outstanding but runs from quantum theory actions in thin films to concrete and asphalt. I think many engineering schools are in effect good trade schools. Texas A&M comes to mind.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-76689206792610496712016-10-29T09:47:30.847-07:002016-10-29T09:47:30.847-07:00@Paul SB:
Not to turn this into the suburbs of the...@Paul SB:<br />Not to turn this into the suburbs of the Cerebus list ;) ...<br /><br />By writing a 300-issue <b>graphic novel</b> over the course of 26 years, I think Dave Sim taught us that such a project is essentially flawed. The idea was that, unlike Superman or the X-Men, this would be a consistent story written by a single author. But 2004-Dave had become a very different person from 1977-Dave. The author of the end of "Church and State" had a very different worldview from the author of "Latter Days", even though they are the same human being.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-76322427068425024992016-10-29T08:16:53.470-07:002016-10-29T08:16:53.470-07:00Donzelion,
What are you doing Halloween? As a tim...Donzelion,<br /><br />What are you doing Halloween? As a time to meet it has the advantage that, not knowing each other's faces, we can home in on costumes. I called and they will be open until 10.Paul SBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-86358480556291521582016-10-29T08:03:15.446-07:002016-10-29T08:03:15.446-07:00Larry,
That's exactly what I thought when I r...Larry,<br /><br />That's exactly what I thought when I read it the first time, and that's how I would like to remember it. It's certainly Suentius Po's take, and at that point it seemed like that character was speaking for the author, especially when his speech suddenly went more colloquial. But the more I thought about his central character, the more it seemed like he was arguing for inevitability. In his cameo appearances he made the point that the little guy just would not change, would never even try to improve and would inevitably live his life as a stereotype. But I suppose you could read that two ways.Paul SBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-2353650608807857012016-10-29T07:57:34.693-07:002016-10-29T07:57:34.693-07:00Paul SB:
Doesn't the cyclic history argument ...Paul SB:<br /><i><br />Doesn't the cyclic history argument get a little tired, anyway? Yeah, yeah, yeah, we've seen this all before! It feeds into the nihilistic narrative that nothing ever changes, so why bother? <br /></i><br /><br />Funny, I saw Dave (Sim) as saying almost the opposite. If we do something of significance, it <b>does</b> matter, not just for this particular cycle of history, but echoing down through the depths of time.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-87293362603003241062016-10-29T07:53:47.079-07:002016-10-29T07:53:47.079-07:00Hamish:
I appreciate the argument here, but is th...Hamish:<br /><i><br />I appreciate the argument here, but is this not parallel to Trump's deflection of accusations of sexism misogyny by pointing at Bill Clinton's past misdeeds?<br /><br />* * * <br /><br />I was referring to your comments in re the Bush emails. The parallel being the comparison between current "scandals" and the actions of former presidents.<br /></i><br /><br />I can't speak for our host--just myself. Caveat emptor.<br /><br />You're on stronger ground about the sexual misconduct than about the e-mail thing (which has suddenly become topical again). If Trump's defense is "Look, I was only doing what seems normal for powerful male celebrities, as evidenced by Secretary Clinton's husband," there's a bit of substance there. <br /><br />To that, I would counter that maybe we're seeing why electing the host of "Celebrity Apprentice" to the presidency isn't a good idea. What's normative behavior in one role seems degrading in the other. President Bill Clinton was <b>embarrassed</b> by the Monica Lewinski for political reasons, even though the relationship was consensual. It's not that he did something criminal with "that woman"--just that it was unseemly to have such goings on in the public discourse. In an earlier age, the mere accusation would have driven Bill to resign before the impeachment hearings. One reason Republicans detest Bill so much is that he not only didn't let the embarrassment drive him from office, he beat the impeachment and finished his term.<br /><br />Trump's accusers who say he forced himself on them have Trump himself as a corroborating witness. The accusations also fit a pattern that is evident in other aspects of Trump's character: He's a bully and a narcissist. <b>Those</b> are the characteristics I don't want anywhere near the Oval Office.<br /><br />So I see a personal difference between Trump and Bill Clinton--not to mention the fact that Bill isn't running for office--but if you see it differently, I can take your point.<br /><br />The e-mail thing, I see less as a criminal matter as one of office protocol. Remember, e-mail was a fairly new thing during the Clinton and then Bush administrations. As our friend Alfred might say, there was no way to fully plan in advance the impact of new modalities with all of the ramifications. If the normal thing to do for Bill Clinton's and Bush's Secretaries of State was to use government e-mail for strict official business while holding private conversations (even <b>about</b> official business) on a separate system to avoid public scrutiny, then that's not so much a case of them "breaking the rules too" as it is of <b>creating</b> the rules. In 2009, Secretary Clinton would have been in the position that I am in when I start a new job at a new office--get to know the unwritten rules by seeing what the veterans do. When I started a programming job 15 years ago, a co-worker gave me a group of production user id's and passwords that everyone used to manually run production jobs. Many years later, those passwords were changed and kept secret because the company was more concerned with audit trails. The rules changed. But in the earlier time, if you would have said to me, "You were wrong to use those user ids, and just because others were wrong doesn't mitigate your crime," I would have argued the point. What other people do in plain sight as normal business and don't get reprimanded for is not "wrong" in any discernible sense.<br /><br />What Dr Brin seems to say is not so much "Bush's people did worse things, so don't blame Hillary" so much as "Hillary was just following the example set before her. <b>If anything</b>, Bush's people acted with more malice aforethought and caused more harm (to investigations against themselves) by their actions. So if you're not going to complain about what <b>they</b> did, it's awfully darned hypocritical to condemn Hillary." A subtle difference, maybe, but I think a good one.<br /><br /><br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-61671134865919989382016-10-29T07:39:08.773-07:002016-10-29T07:39:08.773-07:00Larry,
Regarding that article about Trump support...Larry,<br /><br />Regarding that article about Trump supporters plans to revolt if Trump doesn't win, you know that 99% of it is just tough-guy talk. But for every 100 tough guys who are nothing bur gas bags, there's going to be some twisted fool in the vein of Timothy McVeigh who will actually do something - like those Sovereign Citizen retards for got caught planning to blow up an apartment complex in Kansas last month. Before we had the technology to make rapid-fire weapons and ubiquitous explosives, a kook like that might swing a sword around or shoot one random victim with his musket, then get jumped by the crowd trying to reload or smacked from behind with a chair.<br /><br />With Dave Sim's use of redwoods, way to do cyclic history! But why did he choose a sodium chloride bomb? Was it just a way to mythologize the saltiness of the oceans? In the comic my daughter has been making, a character invents a carbon dioxide bomb, which in a way takes the theme from the 20th C atom bomb apocalypse to the 21st C environmental catastrophe, and makes more sense than an NaCl bomb. I'm not sure what Sims was getting at, or if it is just an artifact of a poor science education on his part. Doesn't the cyclic history argument get a little tired, anyway? Yeah, yeah, yeah, we've seen this all before! It feeds into the nihilistic narrative that nothing ever changes, so why bother? His central character, unable to ever get past his gender stereotypes, made his own life miserable, which made the story seem a little pedantic. But in the end it came across as a hand-wringing "nothing will ever change" narrative.Paul SBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-75696237375103353722016-10-29T07:06:48.383-07:002016-10-29T07:06:48.383-07:00Tacitus,
Your student shows that the high school ...Tacitus,<br /><br />Your student shows that the high school to college to career route just isn't the only option. 50% of high school graduates attempt college these days, and 50% of those drop out within the first year. So what happens to those who don't go to college? The problem, as I se it, is this rather American attitude that over-emphasizes competition and ignores contentment. In Germany only 10% of students go to a university - the natural-born eggheads - but trade schools are taken seriously as institutions. Whereas here the university route is treated like it is some God-given right and only stupid people don't follow the One Path. High schools get more cred the more of their students go to college, which encourages more young people with kids to move into the district. That gets the school district more government money (which in my district gets squandered by administration on useless prettying-up projects instead of going to things that would actually help the students - class size reduction being #1). <br /><br />As far as most of what gets taught being nonsense, I'm kind of iffy on that one. Under the old standards imposed by the Bush Administration, I and my colleagues spent a lot of time scratching our heads and asking why it was important for every child to know certain things, like the many fardling details of the Kreb's Cycle. If your student is now 26, he grew up under NCLB, and I would be inclined to agree with him on many fronts. When I was in school myself I often wondered if the History curriculum were not just a propaganda tool. I refuse to use the term "social science" for what gets taught in high school history. Nearly all the high school history teachers I have known have been blatant science deniers and wouldn't know scientific standards of evidence if it bit them in the ass. One history teacher at my school insists on telling our students that climate change is a left-wing political fabrication, so whenever I teach the atmosphere unit I keep getting students telling me that "Mr. Lynch says it's all bullshit and I'm a damn liberal! Why should we believe you?"<br /><br />Ah, but overall, it seems to me it is less about what is being taught than how. If schools go more into depth on topics and depend less on trying to "cover" massive numbers of disjointed facts, students would learn how to think, rather than merely how to fill in bubbles on their multiple-guess tests. Especially in this era in which so much information is available for free on the internet, but it is scattered among massive amounts of utter drivel, having young people wade through that themselves, learning to distinguish between fact and opinion and outright motivated lies will make for more intelligent, more resilient people who can solve problems, and not merely bobble their heads to authority. As a science teacher I have always found it ironic that I am supposed to just tell students about all these facts scientists discovered, and they are supposed to believe everything I say, when the very nature of science is to not believe a damn thing unless you have proof. Fortunately the new standards recognize this.<br /><br />As far as my nephew's Plan B goes, he didn't really have one. He's working for his father's business, and not doing it well because he doesn't have much enthusiasm for it. But at the age of 35 he still acts like a teenager, more concerned about what kind of car he's driving and how many girlfriends he can catch with it. Only child - what can I say?Paul SBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-15750902070466704032016-10-29T06:41:43.806-07:002016-10-29T06:41:43.806-07:00Duncan,
It's not just that H. tryitouticus ha...Duncan,<br /><br />It's not just that H. tryitouticus has the ability to try different things, it's that the species has been doing exactly that for 200 kilo years, and is unlikely to ever stop trying. The cynicism brought on by failed 20th Century experiments in "social engineering" (fascism, communism, etc) notwithstanding, humans are rarely satisfied with their lot in life and there are always those who will try to make things better. They will always have to contend with those whose intentions are evil while they are at it, because humans are a variable enough species to express the whole range from satanic to saintly, even within the same individual. The cynicism Alfred expresses strikes me as a more intelligent, well-conceived version of the witless paranoia a couple of our other commentators succumb to. Both are baggage of the Cold War. But in a sense they are useful, in that we know planning can be done very badly with heinous consequences. We probably need some level of cynicism to keep people from swerving into really dangerous territory.Paul SBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63882819931980937992016-10-29T05:23:34.459-07:002016-10-29T05:23:34.459-07:00Paul SB
Your nephew the thwarted (by himself) med...Paul SB<br /><br />Your nephew the thwarted (by himself) medical device engineer....what became Plan B? Or perhaps there isn't one yet.<br /><br />As a teacher you might find interesting the career arc of one of my kids. Mediocre grades in HS because he felt, correctly, that much of what he was being taught was nonsense. Took every shop class there was. Did not want to go to college and become an engineer because said engineers were impractical pencil pushers. Goes to Tech and becomes a machinist. THEN goes to college and becomes an engineer. Now designs robotic assembly equipment that makes medical devices. He tells me the real money is in consulting once you understand the regulatory process. So he can design a part, actually fab the prototype, and soon he will be able to navigate the regulatory maze. The mice that can do that find the Big Cheese.<br /><br />He's 26.<br /><br />Nice to not talk politics. Regards the latest I have my 24 hour rule in effect. But I figure the amount of spin coming out of D.C. today is probably to the point where the hacks spinning to the left and to the right are doing so with such intense gyroscopic forces that if any one of them takes an inopportune bathroom break the whole city will fly apart, bits landing as far away as Omaha.<br /><br />Tacitus Tacitushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17007086196578740689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-86386600724490384042016-10-29T03:37:50.686-07:002016-10-29T03:37:50.686-07:00Hi Paul
I believe you have put your finger right ...Hi Paul<br /><br />I believe you have put your finger right on where I disagree with Alfred <br /><br />I don't expect to be able to "plan" and predict all of the outcomes of tweaking the parameters of our society but I do believe that Homo. Tryitouticus. (I love that) has the ability to try different things and keep fiddling until it goes better (back to the engine analogy)duncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-60699989560467754452016-10-28T22:19:21.755-07:002016-10-28T22:19:21.755-07:00Alfred,
Back to the idea of planning:
"The ...Alfred,<br /><br />Back to the idea of planning:<br /><br />"The real issue is they can’t know what the community knows. It simply isn’t possible to centralize the information they need on which to make good decisions. At best, they can centralize some of it and make the best decisions they can. One needs something to close to omniscience to accomplish the real task. One needs to be a transcendent like V Vinge described. Communities contain distributed knowledge that none of the members contain within them in whole."<br /><br />Certainly bad planners assume that they have infinite knowledge (The Fallacy of Immaculate Perception) and this is quite common, but you are presuming all planning is incompetent and that planning cannot account for emergent properties. In a way you have attempted to define away the possibility of competent planning when you say that the Constitution was frame for government and not a plan. How is a frame not a plan? It is not a plan in every tiny detail, it is a broad, overall plan, but a plan nonetheless.<br /><br />Another assumption you appear to be make (and correct me if I am wrong once again) is that planners are not part of the community that uses what is being planned, that they are somehow inevitably isolated from the objects of their planning. I could certainly see that in the car elf my school district's board and superintendent, neither of which seem to have a clue what it is the teachers & staff do on a daily basis, but to generalize from there is both cynical and inaccurate. An architect goes to school to learn how to plan out buildings, most of which is about safety, but architects live and work in buildings all their lives. They are every bit as much a part of Galton's mob as the average construction worker who builds those buildings. <br /><br />I have a nephew whose ambition it was to become an engineer specializing in the creation of medical equipment. Once he graduated from high school he started digging into the profession in detail and discovered that it was going to take him twice as long to be able to do that, because he would have had to learn both the engineering aspects and the medical/biological aspects of it. Her had to understand both what the doctors need and how devices could be planned to accomplish the doctors' goals. He ended up giving up on that plan. he was honestly too lazy and spoiled to put up with that much time in school before he could start making money and buying fancy cars, which is what he was really most interested in. Not every planner sits in some ivory tower, disconnected from the world they plan.<br /><br />"That doesn’t mean we can’t create constraints on what they try to do, but tight constraints are a form of central planning again."<br /><br />Once again, your definition of planning seems to be based on Orwellian assumptions. A wise planner understands that not everything can be planned, that there is a sweet spot between too tight and too loose in terms of constraints. Not all planning is bad planning, even central planning. Our host constantly talks about markets as great democratizers, but if they are constrained too much by central planning, they are stifled. If they are constrained too little by central planning, they stifle themselves through the growth of monopolies that destroy competition. The Sherman Anti-Trust Act was not built into the U.S. Constitution, but it was made possible by that plan, and was itself a plan to rebalance a system in which an emergent property was its own self destruction. Good planners know that they don't know everything and incorporate methods of gathering information and adapting.<br /><br />"At best, they can centralize some of it and make the best decisions they can."<br />Isn't that the best anyone can do? The best they can? Your portrayal of planning is starting to sound kind of straw, and making the perfect the enemy of the good. Let's not call it "planning" if it isn't perfect, and since perfection isn't possible, planning isn't possible. Sounds like something out of a Jerry Lewis movie.Paul SBnoreply@blogger.com