I’m downloading the updated iTunes (for Windoze), so I can update from 6.x to 7.
A 34M download?? Holy download, Batman!
And – currently – very s…l…o…w download – not my connection, but Apple is (apparently) getting hammered since yesterday’s announcements.
Still: 34M? Ouch for dial-up users.
I officially have no comment.
Too many conflicting emotions.
So it’s not passing unnoticed – this is a day that changed America, and, to a lesser degree, the world – it’s just that I have too many comments.
Officially, no comment.
OK, there is a lot of stuff re: the Iraq war and so on that I find disturbing, but this latest bit of news – from Brigadier General Mark Scheid, commander of the Army Transportation Corps (one of the early planners for the war in Iraq) – makes so much sense that it hurts:
Months before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld forbade military strategists from developing plans for securing a post-war Iraq, the retiring commander of the Army Transportation Corps said Thursday.
In fact, said Brig. Gen. Mark Scheid, Rumsfeld said “he would fire the next person” who talked about the need for a post-war plan.
— Eustis chief: Iraq post-war plan muzzled, Hampton Roads dailypresss.com
This is from one of the military honchos in charge of the Iraq issue, and he’s saying the Defense Secretary forbade any post-war planning.
Huh? WTF?
Sure, Scheid could be lying, embellishing or fudging, but how often do Brigadier Generals do this? To this degree? And his comments certainly fit with the – to many eyes – lack of “exit strategy plan” we have in Iraq.
Either way…ouch…
United 93I almost passed on watching this movie, simply because the subject matter – a fictionalized account of the 9/11 hijacking that crashed due to passenger intervention – seemed to recent and real to be anything but exploitive or painful.
But I watched, and – while painful – it was very well done and extremely powerful, and not at all in an over the top way.
The use of no-name actors was the key, to me: If one of the stewardesses was Julia Roberts or a passenger was Al Pacino, it would have broken that illusion of something terrible happening to real people.
Not a comfortable movie, but very well done.
Guess what? I don’t know how to save social security – and, if I did – why would I tell you (gentle reader)? However, hear me out for some insights.
I guess I just had an epiphany recently when both Ford and General Motors posted dire financial news. Lots of articles about the fall of two of the Big 3 American automakers (the third, Chrysler, is now part German…), but the one fact that stuck with me is the following: Germany/Sweden/Japan can better compete in the auto market because those countries of some degree of a national health plan.
The U.S. doesn’t.
Let’s leave aside the whole issue of medical litigation in the U.S., and just agree that – in general – health care costs have skyrocketed in the U.S. over the past decade or two, and employeers with huge labor forces – especially a largly blue-collar workforce – are hurting keeping up with their part of these premiums. The workers are affected in a similar manner, so there is pressure from the unions/employees etc. to raise salaries to help workers pay for their portion.
Etc etc…….
Not so in countries with national health care.
So what the hell does this have to do with social security?
Well, social security is basically on the road to bankruptcy. If current trends hold, just about the time I’m due to retire, I won’t be able to collect.
All gone…
This is basically true for all entitlements: welfare, medicare/medicaid, social security.
And entitlements are a huge portion of the federal budget. Overwhelmingly large.
Yes, we spend a lot on national defense (20%), but more on social security – and if you add all entitlements together, you get a vast majority of federal outlays:
(Fiscal Year 2005 figures)
OK, so we spend a lot on entitlements, but let’s take a look at some of the reasons we have to shell out these entitlements:
And so on.
Basically, if everyone was able to work, entitlements pay-ins would increase and payouts would drop (perfect case scenario, obviously – there will always be those gaming the system in one way or another). We still might have a crunch, but it would be more manageable.
To me, however, the biggest change we can make to this country is to have some degree of national healthcare. Perhaps make it portable – there can be competition for which program you select, much as there is competion for the bank you select.
But when I change a job, I just fill out one form and tell the new employer where to deposit my check. I still pay the same checking fees at my bank if I work at IBM or the local 7-11. I don’t have to change from checking/savings to checking only and so on.
Why can’t I just tell my new employer where to send my health insurance co-pay (if necessary) or have it none of the new employer’s business (I may pay all, which would be a small fraction of today’s total)?
I don’t have to change my bank or bank program when I change jobs, so why should I have to change my doctor? Or dentist? Or level of coverage? Isn’t that sorta absurd? Isn’t that a lot of paperwork/processing/postage for nothing?
This’ll never happen because it cuts out a lot of powerful middlemen (health insurance brokers and, to some degree, insurers) with lots of PAC money, but it might just have to come to this. It’ll keep costs down, which will make it easier for those employers to keep you on its payrolls. Less unemployement, greater productivity, less entitlement outlay for the federal and local governments, and greater payments into those programs (if I’m unemployed, I’m not paying into Social Security…).
I have not presented this well, and it’s just starting to gel in my mind, but here is the bottom line of what I’m thinking: Fix health care, and you’ll have made an enormous stride toward fixing Social Security.
And improved the life and finances of the care-givers (hospitals, doctors) and the care-receivers (patient).
But it takes money away from insurance companies and insurance brokers. That’s the battle.
Rather, one of the many battles.
Scoble – one of my favorite bloggers – visited the GooglePlex recently and had this to report:
Every interaction I had with Googlers this time was different than the last time I was on campus. They seemed more humble. More comfortable. More inquisitive. And, when I gave them chances to say “you’re an idiot” they didn’t take it (and I gave them many opportunities). This is a different Google than I was used to.
Scoble gave no real reason why this change of attitude/environment occured, but the implication was that Google is facing obstacles, and they have accepted this.
My take away?
Scoble is no longer at Microsoft. While still identified with the company, he is no longer working at Microsoft.
Huge difference. So of course the employees of a fierce competitor will now appear to behave differently – they are not meeting with the enemy. (And I don’t mean that in a negative way; just as a business reality).
Or I could be missing something/everything….
Forrest GumpI finally purchased this DVD, and it’s a great movie on a number of levels: 1) Special effects magic; 2) The stor(ies) of the Boomer generation encapsulated in the main characters’ lives; 3) Wonderful music, and intelligent use thereof; 4) Just a nice, not too-sweet love story.
Hey, any one of those four apply to almost no movies coming out these days; this has them all…
Through the magic of Ebay, I purchased another digital camera body and had the fine folks at lifepixel.com convert it for infrared photography.
When I shot film, one of my passions was IR photography, and I missed it when I moved digital. When I saw it was possible to convert a digital body for IR, well, I’m in!
But here are the reasons for my blues over infrared:
Oh well, have to make the time.
Saw a community theatre version of “Miss Saigon” – was a very good time. It was in a small theatre, so it was nice to be close enough to have the music hit you and to see the smallest facial expressions of the actors/actresses.
I knew a cast member, as well – fun to see her camp it up on stage.
I didn’t know anything about the musical before today, except that it has something to do with the Vietnam war and some love story was involved. About two-thirds of the way through the play, however, I knew how it would end (I was correct).
There were some nice ensemble dance numbers, and I liked the music, which is good for having never heard it before (to me, musical numbers often have to grow on you).
First time we’ve hit a show in some time; a good time was had by all.
Almost FamousA based-on-fact fictional tale of writer/director’s Crowe’s teen years as a Rolling Stone journalist. This is not a classic, but a sweet and bittersweet look back at rock and roll, coming of age, journalism and love.
It is!
Always a compelling watch – this was from my own DVD collection – in a very lighthearted, completely enjoyable way.
Kate Hudson steals the movie as Penny Lane, the consumate Band-Aid, and Frances McDormand (as always) brings a neurotic brilliance to her role as the mother of the young Crowe . (Don’t take drugs!)
I really haven’t written much for the last couple of weeks for two very simple reasons:
And – while this doesn’t always seem to hold in the blogosphere – I think it’s good to be quiet when there isn’t anything to say.
Call me old fashioned.
Or old.
Or out of fashion.
All may apply; whom am I to say?
That said, I do have some stuff brewing in my brain that requires the need of writing to help (me) clarify; so you may not be done with me yet.
My name is Kyle MacDonald and I traded one red paperclip for a house. I started with one red paperclip on July 12 2005 and 14 trades later, on July 12, 2006 I will trade with the Town of Kipling Saskatchewan for a house located at 503 Main Street.
— Kyle MacDonald, One Red Paperclip
Toss in the milliondollarhomepage.com guy, and, well, you’ve just gotta shake your head (for many, many reasons….).
The Weatherman
I like Nicolas Cage; I like enigmatic movies. This has/is both.
I still didn’t like it; didn’t quite get it.
It was fine to watch; had some funny moments, but I will never watch this movie again.
I guess I was expecting something different – the trailers show Cage roaming the city with a bow and arrow. And in this movie, he is very much a man on the edge – I kept waiting for him to go postal and start firing those arrows. Never happened.
Shot (exteriors) in the Chicago area, where I’m from, so that’s fun, but – overall – unimpressive.
We all know the line about how the internet is gutting newspapers’ profitablity/relevance. And, to a large degree, this is true.
But there is one other compelling reason that today’s newspapers are not so compelling: Business.
Newspapers are increasingly profit-driven, especially as consolidation takes away the hometown-news focus and moves that focus to the corporation’s bottom line.
This was driven home in a very really way in an article by Knight Ridder’s Mike Cassidy:
So, Monday morning I left my office on Ridder Park Drive and drove to the Fairmont hotel next to the Knight Ridder building in San Jose. There, chief executive Tony Ridder announced that Knight Ridder newspapers was dead.
…
Listening to Ridder and the video, it seemed all the more tragic that Knight Ridder’s 32-year run is over. There were the 85 Pulitzer Prizes. The tradition of philanthropy. The history of hiring diversity.
It left me wondering why. Almost like a child, I kept thinking this didn’t really have to happen. This company didn’t have to go away.
To which, in his speech, Ridder answered that the end was inevitable.
Shareholders — big institutional investors — wanted more for their investment. Top-flight journalism wasn’t their concern.
If they hadn’t prevailed this time, they would have eventually.
— Cassidy: Sad requiem for esteemed KR standards, Mike Cassidy, Mercury News, June 27, 2006
Agree or not whether or not big institutional investors should care about solid journalism (or solid [whatever your investment is in]), the general truth is the one Ridder stated.
So, not only are newspapers under siege from the internet and 24-hour TV news, but the corporate chiefs are turning a blind eye to the quality of the product. Yes, that’s a way to just about guarantee your product will continue to deteriorate.
This is understandable, but still sad. There’s a reason the press – most notably the print press – is regarded as the Fourth Estate. We have the three branches of government – legislative, executive and judicial – with an elaborate (sometimes arcane…) set of checks and balances. But it’s often up to the outsiders, this Fourth Estate, to make a fuss when those check and balances are not exercised (or exercised improperly and so on).
To a large degree, the online community is doing an excellent job of examining the checks and balances, but you often need a depth of reporting (full staff) and an institution behind you to break the big stories.
If Dana Priest had just been a blogger, do you really think she – the same person as the Washington Post reporter – would have been able to crack the CIA secret prisons story, for which she won a Pulitzer?
Doubtful.
So there is a need for newspapers, even if they end up online only. The New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post – they’re all doing some excellent work, and it would seem a true loss to have them replaced by a bunch of independent blogs.
So remember, it’s not just the internet killing newspapers – it’s also short-sighted, bottom-line focused business decisions that have nothing to do with content that’s crippling the print media.