Monday, August 30, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Small Business holds tight to cash
A survey out this week shows that small businesses are doing as well or better than they were last year, but they're holding tight to cash and most don't plan to make big hiring or capital spending moves any time soon. Such a finding may render moot all the debate in Washington about aiding small business through either tax cuts or easing of lending. Business owners just won't spend any way, until there's some sign of consumer confidence returning, as I point out in this article in Portfolio.com.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Credit to Obama where it's due
The Economist, no fan of President Barack Obama's bold bailout of GM and Chrysler allows as how the bailout should have gone horribly wrong, but has instead largely succeeded. There's an analysis of why GM is in better-than-expected shape that I did at Portfolio.com.
Obama looks to Reagan
The Washington Post's Dan Balz has an interesting take on how Obama can survive the current downturn in his political fortunes. He points out that Ronald Reagan had similar numbers during the second year of his presidency, and that both president's numbers were accompanied by stubborn recessions and high unemployment. So if the economy rebounds by 2012, Obama could still sail to victory. The big if, though, is a robust recovery, which very few are predicting.
Carly Fiorina: A disastrous CEO wants to go to Senate
So let's get this straight. Carly Fiorina is running for Senate on her bona fides as the former CEO of a major American corporation. But here's the problem. She was widely viewed as a disaster for Hewlett-Packard. Stocks in the computer maker soared on the day she was canned. Mark Hurd, who succeeded her, has been unceremoniously dumped as well. But he was widely credited for rescuing the company from her mismanagement. So why on earth would we want her as a Senator when she's running on a record that's at best mixed?
A tempest in Manhattan
Frank Rich has a good column today on how the right-wing media led by Fox News and the New York Post ginned up controversy over the Islamic Center planned for lower Manhattan, and how that controversy undermines support for our last-ditch effort to salvage something from the war in Afghanistan.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Just for the record: Obama's a Christian
One in five Americans believe President Barack Obama is a Muslim, and nearly half of Americans don't know what his religion is.
Just so you know, Obama is a Christian. He may not be beloved by right-wing Christians like Focus on the Family. But he's a Christian. And for you birthers out there, he's also an American.As James Carville said, "Some people are just out and out stupid."
Just so you know, Obama is a Christian. He may not be beloved by right-wing Christians like Focus on the Family. But he's a Christian. And for you birthers out there, he's also an American.As James Carville said, "Some people are just out and out stupid."
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
How Palin and fellow demagogues increased cancer victims' suffering
Remember all the geniuses like Sarah Palin claiming there would be death panels ready to pull the plug on grandma because health care reform included plans for palliative care?
Well, turns out a new study shows palliative care actually extends life as it makes it more comfortable for terminal lung cancer patients.
But thanks to demagogues like Palin and Rush Limbaugh and the lack of courage of our elected leaders, coverage for consultation about palliative was struck from the health care bill. Thanks Sarah and Rush, for killing the sick sooner and making them suffer more.
Well, turns out a new study shows palliative care actually extends life as it makes it more comfortable for terminal lung cancer patients.
But thanks to demagogues like Palin and Rush Limbaugh and the lack of courage of our elected leaders, coverage for consultation about palliative was struck from the health care bill. Thanks Sarah and Rush, for killing the sick sooner and making them suffer more.
Palin's home state bellies up to the federal trough
The state where Tea Party darling Sarah Palin shoots moose and rails against government spending isn't shy about bellying up to the government trough.
Alaska, where they grow their politicians anti-government, got the biggest per capita share of stimulus spending. Think they'd be a little more grateful for all that government largess up there.
Alaska, where they grow their politicians anti-government, got the biggest per capita share of stimulus spending. Think they'd be a little more grateful for all that government largess up there.
Monday, August 16, 2010
President touts clean energy jobs, but Senate inaction puts jobs on hold
President Barack Obama used an event near Milwaukee to tout his clean energy agenda and the jobs created by the stimulus package early in his administration.
But there’s still a ton of work to be done to get the economy back on track, as a new survey of homebuilders out today shows. Homebuilders are more down in the dumps than they have been since the depths of the Great Recession, March 2009.
Little wonder they’re so far down, since there’s a huge backlog of foreclosed homes on the market, and consumers facing a 9.5 percent unemployment rate and five workers for every open job aren’t exactly in a big-spending mood.
As for clean energy, a cornerstone of job creation Obama promised during the 2008 election, it’s largely on hold, thanks to dysfunction and fecklessness by both parties in the U.S. Senate. A bill that should have been passed to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions from burning coal, oil and natural gas would have created the funding to create the infrastructure needed for all those clean energy jobs and set a price that made clean energy competitive with fossil fuel.
But the Senate punted. The president can talk all he wants, but without a cost on carbon, and massive investment, we’ll be waiting a long time for those jobs of the future.
But there’s still a ton of work to be done to get the economy back on track, as a new survey of homebuilders out today shows. Homebuilders are more down in the dumps than they have been since the depths of the Great Recession, March 2009.
Little wonder they’re so far down, since there’s a huge backlog of foreclosed homes on the market, and consumers facing a 9.5 percent unemployment rate and five workers for every open job aren’t exactly in a big-spending mood.
As for clean energy, a cornerstone of job creation Obama promised during the 2008 election, it’s largely on hold, thanks to dysfunction and fecklessness by both parties in the U.S. Senate. A bill that should have been passed to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions from burning coal, oil and natural gas would have created the funding to create the infrastructure needed for all those clean energy jobs and set a price that made clean energy competitive with fossil fuel.
But the Senate punted. The president can talk all he wants, but without a cost on carbon, and massive investment, we’ll be waiting a long time for those jobs of the future.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
The Senate, where dysfunction reigns
George Packer has a fantastic piece in The New Yorker that outlines the struggles of those trying to get anything done in the U.S. Senate. I’d highly recommend that anyone interested in learning why our political leaders can’t seem to do the will of the American people--when that will can even be clearly determined--invest the time necessary to read this article.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Fed up workers ready to say good-bye
Daniel Gross of Slate has an interesting take on the spectacular exit of Jet Blue employee Steven Slater, and how it applies to the overall workforce.
Turns out, not surprisingly, that employees are tired of seeing their companies rake in the bucks while laying them off without a thought, pushing them to work more hours, driving down pay, and refusing to reinstate cuts made to 401(k) contributions. As Gross points out, big companies have been highly profitable, largely on the backs of cuts to payroll.
Here’s a quick thought to add. Steven Slater may not be the only one not willing to take it any more. A study from workplace supplier Regus finds that 40 percent of professionals are considering quitting their jobs after summer vacation.
Turns out, not surprisingly, that employees are tired of seeing their companies rake in the bucks while laying them off without a thought, pushing them to work more hours, driving down pay, and refusing to reinstate cuts made to 401(k) contributions. As Gross points out, big companies have been highly profitable, largely on the backs of cuts to payroll.
Here’s a quick thought to add. Steven Slater may not be the only one not willing to take it any more. A study from workplace supplier Regus finds that 40 percent of professionals are considering quitting their jobs after summer vacation.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Whitacre’s departure holds up GM IPO filing, and a few thoughts on the bailout
General Motors was expected to file the prospectus for its much-anticipated Initial Public Offering Friday. But it looks like the announcement that CEO Ed Whitacre is on his way out has delayed that filing.
Whitacre announced Thursday that he would be leaving the automaker in September, after guiding it through restructuring and restoring it to profitability. He’ll be replaced by Dan Akerson, lately of the private equity giant Carlyle Group and an appointee to the GM board by the Treasury Department when the government took its 60 percent stake in the automaker.
Akerson, like Whitacre, comes to running a car company without auto industry experience. Both men made their marks in telecom.
Reuters reports that sources say the IPO filing will be delayed to take into account the change at the top.
The GM IPO, through which the automaker plans to pay back the government, is expected this fall, and would mark a major victory for President Barack Obama, who forged ahead with a bailout in the face of significant political opposition.
And opposition remains. Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley wants a probe of the IPO to ensure that the public will get top dollar when GM sells stocks again.
I certainly sympathize with that opposition; no one likes to see the government come to the rescue of a private enterprise, especially one mismanaged for decades as GM was. But it’s also hard to argue that the nation isn’t better off for having saved an industrial giant, as long as we get our money back.
There are even auto dealers now clamoring for more product from GM. Who would have thought that could happen a year ago?
Whitacre announced Thursday that he would be leaving the automaker in September, after guiding it through restructuring and restoring it to profitability. He’ll be replaced by Dan Akerson, lately of the private equity giant Carlyle Group and an appointee to the GM board by the Treasury Department when the government took its 60 percent stake in the automaker.
Akerson, like Whitacre, comes to running a car company without auto industry experience. Both men made their marks in telecom.
Reuters reports that sources say the IPO filing will be delayed to take into account the change at the top.
The GM IPO, through which the automaker plans to pay back the government, is expected this fall, and would mark a major victory for President Barack Obama, who forged ahead with a bailout in the face of significant political opposition.
And opposition remains. Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley wants a probe of the IPO to ensure that the public will get top dollar when GM sells stocks again.
I certainly sympathize with that opposition; no one likes to see the government come to the rescue of a private enterprise, especially one mismanaged for decades as GM was. But it’s also hard to argue that the nation isn’t better off for having saved an industrial giant, as long as we get our money back.
There are even auto dealers now clamoring for more product from GM. Who would have thought that could happen a year ago?
Thursday, August 12, 2010
How Harry Reid's cynical game playing doomed climate legislation, and a hope for its resurrection
A panel appointed by President Barack Obama has bolstered the argument for climate change and energy legislation and maybe won some coal state votes for such a measure.
The panel found promise in so-called carbon capture technology--in which carbon dioxide emitted by burning such fossil fuels as coal, oil and natural gas--is buried instead of being released into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is the number one gas responsible for global warming.
But here’s the catch for carbon capture, the panel found. It’s likely to be expensive, at least to begin with, and it won’t happen without a price placed on the release of carbon dioxide.
And Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader from Nevada, has sacrificed any meaningful legislation to reform America’s energy picture for his own political ends.
Here’s how. Earlier this summer, Reid precipitously decided to move immigration reform to the top of the agenda, ahead of climate change and energy legislation. It was a purely political move, designed to appeal to Hispanic voters in Nevada, where Reid faces a tough race. And it was a nakedly cynical move, too, that guaranteed that neither climate change legislation nor immigration reform would happen.
That’s because Sen. Lindsay Graham, the occasionally sane Republican from South Carolina, had been working with Democrat John Kerry and Independent Joe Lieberman on climate and energy legislation and when Reid put immigration ahead of it, Graham backed out.
Ironically, Graham had also been providing some bipartisan support for immigration reform as well, and pulled out of that initiative as well, dooming hope for such reform this year as well.
Reid had to know all that would happen, and he sacrificed two critically important pieces of legislation, and the opportunity to make that legislation happen, to his own political ends.
Does anybody wonder why folks can’t stand Congress?
In any case, here’s hoping that the next Congress will act in a more serious manner, and take care of such important matters as energy reform and climate legislation, which both President Barack Obama and Senator John McCain supported in the 2008 campaign. Then we can go forward with such technologies as carbon capture, and use them to bridge the way to a clean energy future.
The panel found promise in so-called carbon capture technology--in which carbon dioxide emitted by burning such fossil fuels as coal, oil and natural gas--is buried instead of being released into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is the number one gas responsible for global warming.
But here’s the catch for carbon capture, the panel found. It’s likely to be expensive, at least to begin with, and it won’t happen without a price placed on the release of carbon dioxide.
And Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader from Nevada, has sacrificed any meaningful legislation to reform America’s energy picture for his own political ends.
Here’s how. Earlier this summer, Reid precipitously decided to move immigration reform to the top of the agenda, ahead of climate change and energy legislation. It was a purely political move, designed to appeal to Hispanic voters in Nevada, where Reid faces a tough race. And it was a nakedly cynical move, too, that guaranteed that neither climate change legislation nor immigration reform would happen.
That’s because Sen. Lindsay Graham, the occasionally sane Republican from South Carolina, had been working with Democrat John Kerry and Independent Joe Lieberman on climate and energy legislation and when Reid put immigration ahead of it, Graham backed out.
Ironically, Graham had also been providing some bipartisan support for immigration reform as well, and pulled out of that initiative as well, dooming hope for such reform this year as well.
Reid had to know all that would happen, and he sacrificed two critically important pieces of legislation, and the opportunity to make that legislation happen, to his own political ends.
Does anybody wonder why folks can’t stand Congress?
In any case, here’s hoping that the next Congress will act in a more serious manner, and take care of such important matters as energy reform and climate legislation, which both President Barack Obama and Senator John McCain supported in the 2008 campaign. Then we can go forward with such technologies as carbon capture, and use them to bridge the way to a clean energy future.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Companies hoard, politicians fiddle, as economy burns
Here’s a thought from the folks at The Economist: Corporate profits are nearly all in, and they’re approaching the highs last seen before the beginning of the recession.
Just how are the big businesses doing it? And why is no one benefiting? Well, lay offs and capital cost cutting are padding profits for now. Companies are sitting on cash, about $1.8 trillion as of mid-July. It’s not sustainable, but it’s getting them though the quarters. And it’s all about keeping the shareholders happy now, or as happy as anyone can be these days. Never mind that such cuts are likely to end in weaker companies down the road.
Meanwhile today, the brethren of the big businesses at the smaller end of the scale showed once again that they are suffering. A survey out from the National Federation of Independent Business shows small business confidence slipped for the second time in two months, and is now down for the year so far. More small businesses are now thinking of cutting employees than adding them, a grim thought when you consider that small businesses tend to be the ones who hire us out of recessions and the unemployment rate is 9.5 percent.
And as if the news couldn’t get worse, productivity numbers released by the Department of Labor were down for the first time since the dismal last quarter of 2008. That’s very troubling, because it shows companies aren’t doing more with less any more, they’re just doing less.
That’s a recipe for a grim summer. But if that weren’t enough, we’re now well into the politicking season, so hope for Washington to come up with any kind of solution or stimulus is pretty dim.
Repeated attempts to ram a bill through the Senate that would have at least eased credit for small businesses by providing capital to small banks and provided tax credits for small businesses getting off the ground failed as Republicans held tightly together to block Main Street relief. It’s unlikely the bill would do a lot immediately to boost small business spending, but it would be a sign that our leaders cared about something more than getting reelected.
And frankly, the small banks could use some help, since we’re already past the 100 mark for bank closures this year. Small businesses are also still having trouble getting financing, so a bill aimed at making such financing easier to get would seem to make sense.
But again, the hope for help from Washington is pretty dim. It’s campaign season after all.
Here’s how President Barack Obama saw it when speaking to a group of Democratic donors in Austin Monday: “The other side has resisted every attempt. We’ve got a bill right now that was pending in the Senate to provide assistance to small businesses. Now, this should be as American as apple pie. Small businesses create two out of every three jobs in America. So we put together a package, paid for—doesn’t add to the deficit—that would help small businesses get loans, would eliminate the capital gains rate for small business start-ups,” Obama said. “And yet we still can’t get it moving through the Senate, because these folks—their basic theory is, we don't want to do anything that helps the president move the country forward, because they’re thinking about the next election instead of the next generation.”
For those who like to see things from the optimistic side, there’s always hope that the next election will bring politicians to Washington ready to tackle our economic problems. And that the next quarter corporate leaders at big companies ready to spend a little of the cash they’re sitting on investing in the future instead of squeezing every penny in the present.
But that hope’s pretty dim right now. And in its place, as J. Jennings Moss points out in Portfolio.com, is anger.
Just how are the big businesses doing it? And why is no one benefiting? Well, lay offs and capital cost cutting are padding profits for now. Companies are sitting on cash, about $1.8 trillion as of mid-July. It’s not sustainable, but it’s getting them though the quarters. And it’s all about keeping the shareholders happy now, or as happy as anyone can be these days. Never mind that such cuts are likely to end in weaker companies down the road.
Meanwhile today, the brethren of the big businesses at the smaller end of the scale showed once again that they are suffering. A survey out from the National Federation of Independent Business shows small business confidence slipped for the second time in two months, and is now down for the year so far. More small businesses are now thinking of cutting employees than adding them, a grim thought when you consider that small businesses tend to be the ones who hire us out of recessions and the unemployment rate is 9.5 percent.
And as if the news couldn’t get worse, productivity numbers released by the Department of Labor were down for the first time since the dismal last quarter of 2008. That’s very troubling, because it shows companies aren’t doing more with less any more, they’re just doing less.
That’s a recipe for a grim summer. But if that weren’t enough, we’re now well into the politicking season, so hope for Washington to come up with any kind of solution or stimulus is pretty dim.
Repeated attempts to ram a bill through the Senate that would have at least eased credit for small businesses by providing capital to small banks and provided tax credits for small businesses getting off the ground failed as Republicans held tightly together to block Main Street relief. It’s unlikely the bill would do a lot immediately to boost small business spending, but it would be a sign that our leaders cared about something more than getting reelected.
And frankly, the small banks could use some help, since we’re already past the 100 mark for bank closures this year. Small businesses are also still having trouble getting financing, so a bill aimed at making such financing easier to get would seem to make sense.
But again, the hope for help from Washington is pretty dim. It’s campaign season after all.
Here’s how President Barack Obama saw it when speaking to a group of Democratic donors in Austin Monday: “The other side has resisted every attempt. We’ve got a bill right now that was pending in the Senate to provide assistance to small businesses. Now, this should be as American as apple pie. Small businesses create two out of every three jobs in America. So we put together a package, paid for—doesn’t add to the deficit—that would help small businesses get loans, would eliminate the capital gains rate for small business start-ups,” Obama said. “And yet we still can’t get it moving through the Senate, because these folks—their basic theory is, we don't want to do anything that helps the president move the country forward, because they’re thinking about the next election instead of the next generation.”
For those who like to see things from the optimistic side, there’s always hope that the next election will bring politicians to Washington ready to tackle our economic problems. And that the next quarter corporate leaders at big companies ready to spend a little of the cash they’re sitting on investing in the future instead of squeezing every penny in the present.
But that hope’s pretty dim right now. And in its place, as J. Jennings Moss points out in Portfolio.com, is anger.
Monday, August 9, 2010
It's time to open ourselves to immigration, end drug war
Well, it certainly looks like the Republicans are going to do their best to make immigration one of the top issues of the fall campaign.
Today President Barack Obama came to the University of Texas to talk about education and his plans to push the United States back to the top of the list of countries with college graduates. We currently rank 12th among 36 developed nations, despite a higher education system that attracts thousands of foreign students every year because of its excellence. A little over 40 percent of adults has a college education, and as Obama rightly points out, the nation needs to get to 60 percent and soon. Without that education, we won’t be able to compete in a world economy increasingly driven by what you know.
While the president was talking education, the right-wing governor of Texas, Rick Perry, was making his own splash with a letter to the president calling for more troops at the border. Perry isn’t exactly a credible messenger in some ways, of course. He did memorably start talking secession from the U.S. shortly after Obama came to office.
But before dismissing Perry’s letter as another Republican appeal to the nativist forces of the Tea Party and militia movements--one that has led leading GOP members to call for revocation of citizenship as a birthright for those born in this nation--it’s worth a peak at his argument.
Perry lays out a case for more federal help at the border based on worries that the raging drug war in Mexico could spill over into his state. Already, more than 28,000 people have died in the battles over drugs since 2006, and there’s no end to the carnage in sight.
And there have been a few incidents--including a rise in kidnappings in McAllen and the murder of a drug cartel member--on Perry’s side of the border that rightly concern the governor.
So I’m inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that his concern for the safety of his state’s residents is legitimate. If I were governor of Texas and all hell was breaking loose just across the river and the border was as porous as it is, I’d be worried.
But what Perry neglects in his letter are the two sure ways to end the violence that so concerns him.
One is a comprehensive path to citizenship for the 20 million or so undocumented aliens currently in the United States. We have to face facts. Whether we like the way they got here or not, we’re not going to deport 20 million or more people.
We need to combine that path to citizenship with an open and clear path for the millions more people around the world to come to this country and contribute to our society. One of the great strengths of America throughout its history has been just that openness.
If we embrace such openness, we will reap untold benefits in new waves of entrepreneurial energy from Silicon Valley geniuses who come from India or China or Brazil or any one of dozens of other countries to our great universities and stay to found future tech giants here in the U.S. And we will see that same entrepreneurial energy drive food carts in our cities, dry cleaners and restaurants throughout our nation, and hundreds of other businesses that will create thousands of jobs for new immigrants and old alike.
Immigration is part of the American formula for success, and we should be more open to it, rather than less, as long as we provide a rational and humane system for immigrants to come to our shores and contribute to our society.
The second thing we need to do to address Perry’s concerns is end the drug war in Mexico, along with the ongoing drug trade in Colombia that funds the rebels against that nation’s legitimate government. That, we could do with a simple act of Congress, albeit one that would take more political guts than either the president or Congress currently possess.
We could end the drug wars in Latin America, as well as the violent drug fights in our own native underworld by simply legalizing drugs. No illegal drug trade, and there will be no huge amounts of cash and guns flowing from the United States south to fund the drug battles. Further, there would be no profit incentive for the gangs of Mexico, or, indeed, New York or Chicago, to fight for drug turf. We could pull the plug on the whole thing if we had the political will.
Yes, that would bring the price down for drugs like marijuana and cocaine, and yes, it would to an extent legitimate those drugs and lead to a spike in usage.
But there are ways to combat such undesirable outcomes short of prohibition, which so clearly hasn’t worked. Taxation of drugs could fund effective intervention and treatment programs, as could the money we currently spend locking low-level drug users and dealers in prison. Advertising and public disapproval could be as effective a weapon against drug use as it has been against smoking. You get the idea.
The prohibition of drugs has failed. It’s time to get on with pragmatic approaches to mitigating the damage drugs cause their users, and to ending a failed policy that has cost thousands of lives and will cost thousands more if left unchecked.
And our current immigration policy has failed as well. It’s time we tap into the better angels of our nation’s nature and create as open and transparent a system for allowing immigrants into this nation legally as we can.
Then, Gov. Perry, we can start talking about whether we really need those troops at the border or whether the money we’d spend on them would be better spent on, say, education.
Today President Barack Obama came to the University of Texas to talk about education and his plans to push the United States back to the top of the list of countries with college graduates. We currently rank 12th among 36 developed nations, despite a higher education system that attracts thousands of foreign students every year because of its excellence. A little over 40 percent of adults has a college education, and as Obama rightly points out, the nation needs to get to 60 percent and soon. Without that education, we won’t be able to compete in a world economy increasingly driven by what you know.
While the president was talking education, the right-wing governor of Texas, Rick Perry, was making his own splash with a letter to the president calling for more troops at the border. Perry isn’t exactly a credible messenger in some ways, of course. He did memorably start talking secession from the U.S. shortly after Obama came to office.
But before dismissing Perry’s letter as another Republican appeal to the nativist forces of the Tea Party and militia movements--one that has led leading GOP members to call for revocation of citizenship as a birthright for those born in this nation--it’s worth a peak at his argument.
Perry lays out a case for more federal help at the border based on worries that the raging drug war in Mexico could spill over into his state. Already, more than 28,000 people have died in the battles over drugs since 2006, and there’s no end to the carnage in sight.
And there have been a few incidents--including a rise in kidnappings in McAllen and the murder of a drug cartel member--on Perry’s side of the border that rightly concern the governor.
So I’m inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that his concern for the safety of his state’s residents is legitimate. If I were governor of Texas and all hell was breaking loose just across the river and the border was as porous as it is, I’d be worried.
But what Perry neglects in his letter are the two sure ways to end the violence that so concerns him.
One is a comprehensive path to citizenship for the 20 million or so undocumented aliens currently in the United States. We have to face facts. Whether we like the way they got here or not, we’re not going to deport 20 million or more people.
We need to combine that path to citizenship with an open and clear path for the millions more people around the world to come to this country and contribute to our society. One of the great strengths of America throughout its history has been just that openness.
If we embrace such openness, we will reap untold benefits in new waves of entrepreneurial energy from Silicon Valley geniuses who come from India or China or Brazil or any one of dozens of other countries to our great universities and stay to found future tech giants here in the U.S. And we will see that same entrepreneurial energy drive food carts in our cities, dry cleaners and restaurants throughout our nation, and hundreds of other businesses that will create thousands of jobs for new immigrants and old alike.
Immigration is part of the American formula for success, and we should be more open to it, rather than less, as long as we provide a rational and humane system for immigrants to come to our shores and contribute to our society.
The second thing we need to do to address Perry’s concerns is end the drug war in Mexico, along with the ongoing drug trade in Colombia that funds the rebels against that nation’s legitimate government. That, we could do with a simple act of Congress, albeit one that would take more political guts than either the president or Congress currently possess.
We could end the drug wars in Latin America, as well as the violent drug fights in our own native underworld by simply legalizing drugs. No illegal drug trade, and there will be no huge amounts of cash and guns flowing from the United States south to fund the drug battles. Further, there would be no profit incentive for the gangs of Mexico, or, indeed, New York or Chicago, to fight for drug turf. We could pull the plug on the whole thing if we had the political will.
Yes, that would bring the price down for drugs like marijuana and cocaine, and yes, it would to an extent legitimate those drugs and lead to a spike in usage.
But there are ways to combat such undesirable outcomes short of prohibition, which so clearly hasn’t worked. Taxation of drugs could fund effective intervention and treatment programs, as could the money we currently spend locking low-level drug users and dealers in prison. Advertising and public disapproval could be as effective a weapon against drug use as it has been against smoking. You get the idea.
The prohibition of drugs has failed. It’s time to get on with pragmatic approaches to mitigating the damage drugs cause their users, and to ending a failed policy that has cost thousands of lives and will cost thousands more if left unchecked.
And our current immigration policy has failed as well. It’s time we tap into the better angels of our nation’s nature and create as open and transparent a system for allowing immigrants into this nation legally as we can.
Then, Gov. Perry, we can start talking about whether we really need those troops at the border or whether the money we’d spend on them would be better spent on, say, education.
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Religious groups want torture investigation
At least some religious groups aren’t so blinded by allegiance to the Republican Party and the actions of George W. Bush that they don’t want an accounting of what was done in our name in the post 9/11 world.
A group calling itself the National Religious Campaign Against Torture wants an investigation into allegations that illegal and unethical medical experiments were performed on detainees following the attacks on the United States.
It’s a welcome change in stance from many in the religious community, particularly on the religious right, who uttered not a peep about the tactics used in the so-called War on Terror of the Bush administration.
Of course, it will be interesting to see whether the Obama administration is willing to delve into these allegations, given the current president’s inclination to let bygones be bygones when it comes to the treatment meted out to prisoners and civilians in the past nine years.
A group calling itself the National Religious Campaign Against Torture wants an investigation into allegations that illegal and unethical medical experiments were performed on detainees following the attacks on the United States.
It’s a welcome change in stance from many in the religious community, particularly on the religious right, who uttered not a peep about the tactics used in the so-called War on Terror of the Bush administration.
Of course, it will be interesting to see whether the Obama administration is willing to delve into these allegations, given the current president’s inclination to let bygones be bygones when it comes to the treatment meted out to prisoners and civilians in the past nine years.
Barnes &Noble, Amazon, and the demise of the bookstore
Word last week that Barnes & Noble had put itself up for sale gave me a bittersweet feeling.
As a long-term proponent of the independent and local, I couldn’t help but feel a bit of vindication that this giant slayer of independent bookstores across the nation was now itself in enough hot water to feel the need to shop itself. At the same time, I remembered when the Barnes & Noble opened back more than a decade ago in Myrtle Beach, where we lived at the time.
I remember how excited I was—how enchanted I was to enter that store with its racks of hard-to-get small magazines, the smell of Starbucks coffee wafting through the air, all the newspapers from the New York Times to the Atlanta Journal Constitution. And then there were the books, racks and racks of beautiful books, so much more variety than one could hope for at our local mall store.
The place was a palace for me. I remember how my then six-year-old son and I used to drive to the Barnes & Noble on special outings, the Counting Crows’ August and Everything After playing on the car stereo because for some reason my little boy had fallen in love with that album. I remember turning him loose in a child’s section of books that was as big as many entire bookstores I’d been in.
So, the place had and has an emotional connection to me. I still love walking into a Barnes & Noble, or a Borders, or any other big bookstore.
But it appears they’re on their way out. Just as they endangered the independent bookstore, the big box bookstores are endangered by a new business model, a new way of reading.
I’m speaking, of course, of the advent of Amazon.com, first as a business model capable of delivering print books more cheaply. And now, with the rise, finally of e-readers like the Kindle and game-changing tablets like the iPad, and the absolutely unbeatable price points of books for such devices, the whole premise of the Barnes & Nobles of the world are coming under question.
After all, who needs to go to a bookstore like that when you can get infinitely more delivered to your e-reader or tablet, instantaneously and more cheaply than buying the physical item at a store, even if that store is a palace of the printed word.
When word came out about Barnes & Noble, I asked the question whether trouble for the big booksellers could be a boon in disguise for the small, niche, independents.
After all, small record stores are making it, and record labels continue to come up with innovative ways to sell their product, despite the dominance of digital. And if anyone’s used to countering price competition with service and a local flare, it’s the independent, niche bookseller.
After all, they’ve had to battle Barnes Noble and Borders for so long that Amazon, Apple and their e-books are just another conglomeration of faceless corporate America joining the onslaught.
Here's what one of those independents is doing to stay alive, with thanks to Chris Porter for the tip. In the Detroit area, one of the last of the independents, John King of John King Books North in Ferndale and the Big Bookstore has cut prices to the bone, hoping to boost the revenue he needs to stay in business.
So, good luck to him, and here’s hoping I’m right that there’s a future at least for those independents.
Because it would be a shame to entirely lose that excitement of finding just the right tome on a shelf, perhaps with the help of someone who actually knows a little bit about books.
As a long-term proponent of the independent and local, I couldn’t help but feel a bit of vindication that this giant slayer of independent bookstores across the nation was now itself in enough hot water to feel the need to shop itself. At the same time, I remembered when the Barnes & Noble opened back more than a decade ago in Myrtle Beach, where we lived at the time.
I remember how excited I was—how enchanted I was to enter that store with its racks of hard-to-get small magazines, the smell of Starbucks coffee wafting through the air, all the newspapers from the New York Times to the Atlanta Journal Constitution. And then there were the books, racks and racks of beautiful books, so much more variety than one could hope for at our local mall store.
The place was a palace for me. I remember how my then six-year-old son and I used to drive to the Barnes & Noble on special outings, the Counting Crows’ August and Everything After playing on the car stereo because for some reason my little boy had fallen in love with that album. I remember turning him loose in a child’s section of books that was as big as many entire bookstores I’d been in.
So, the place had and has an emotional connection to me. I still love walking into a Barnes & Noble, or a Borders, or any other big bookstore.
But it appears they’re on their way out. Just as they endangered the independent bookstore, the big box bookstores are endangered by a new business model, a new way of reading.
I’m speaking, of course, of the advent of Amazon.com, first as a business model capable of delivering print books more cheaply. And now, with the rise, finally of e-readers like the Kindle and game-changing tablets like the iPad, and the absolutely unbeatable price points of books for such devices, the whole premise of the Barnes & Nobles of the world are coming under question.
After all, who needs to go to a bookstore like that when you can get infinitely more delivered to your e-reader or tablet, instantaneously and more cheaply than buying the physical item at a store, even if that store is a palace of the printed word.
When word came out about Barnes & Noble, I asked the question whether trouble for the big booksellers could be a boon in disguise for the small, niche, independents.
After all, small record stores are making it, and record labels continue to come up with innovative ways to sell their product, despite the dominance of digital. And if anyone’s used to countering price competition with service and a local flare, it’s the independent, niche bookseller.
After all, they’ve had to battle Barnes Noble and Borders for so long that Amazon, Apple and their e-books are just another conglomeration of faceless corporate America joining the onslaught.
Here's what one of those independents is doing to stay alive, with thanks to Chris Porter for the tip. In the Detroit area, one of the last of the independents, John King of John King Books North in Ferndale and the Big Bookstore has cut prices to the bone, hoping to boost the revenue he needs to stay in business.
So, good luck to him, and here’s hoping I’m right that there’s a future at least for those independents.
Because it would be a shame to entirely lose that excitement of finding just the right tome on a shelf, perhaps with the help of someone who actually knows a little bit about books.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)