Saturday, August 31, 2013

Oh The Hubris, The Hubris

Journalism is never having to say you were wrong. This is from February, 1999. It is looking more and more likely that Larry Summers, the one on the right, will be rewarded by being named the next head of the Fed...although there is still hope for a couple of others.
Federal Reserve Board chmn. Alan Greenspan (C) flanked by Treasury Secy. Robert Robin & Deputy Treasury Secy. Lawrence Summers. Inset:s: The Clintons by Doug Mills-AP; engraving  Shakespeare by Martin Droeshout-Granger Collection


Monday, August 26, 2013

Sports Heroes

Next month will mark the 40th anniversary of the "Battle of the Sexes" between Bobby Riggs and Billie Jean King, and there is apparently a new allegation that Riggs threw the match, with long odds in his favor, to pay off his mafia gambling debts.

These allegations have surfaced before, although I guess the current story involves a person who has come forward for the first time, and I don't care much one way or the other about the speculation. It is still all hearsay. Also, I feel kind of dirty getting my news from Yahoo.com. There was one little item that caught my eye, which was supposedly included as support for the new allegations, but had the exact opposite effect with me. Serena Williams was quoted, completely irrelevantly, as saying that she would lose to Andy Murray 6-0, 6-0. Well, hell, Andy Murray is a top tennis player. Bobby Riggs was already a has been in 1973. His 1939 Wimbledon win was 34 years in the past. 


Whether Riggs threw the match or not, comparing Williams-Murray to King-Riggs is absurd. For some reason, it reminds me of a recent interview given by one of my two all-time favorite sports stars, Bill Russell (the other is Muhammad Ali). The interviewer asked Russell how he thought he would do against today's NBA players. How many points per game did he think he would average? Russell said probably about 10 points. The interviewer, no doubt expecting more braggadocio, was shocked. What?! Only ten points? "Well," said Russell, you have to remember that I'm almost seventy-nine years old."

old."



Always Trying to Be Fair

It´s about time I said something good about Brazil, so I will tell you of an area where I think they are ahead of the U.S.

ATM machines in Brazil have scanners, and every bill/invoice you receive has a bar code. I have never sent a payment through the mails in all the time I´ve been in Brazil; I just go to my nearest ATM. If you don´t like using those impersonal ATMs, you can pay your bills at the teller´s window. Better yet, you can apparently pay your bills at virtually any place that can read bar codes. I´ve seen people paying bills at the supermarket (which is really irritating if you select a line because someone´s cart is virtually empty only to have them pull a stack of invoices out of their purse) and at the department store.

I don´t know how long this system has been in place. The possible irony is that the U.S. simply bypassed this phase and went directly to internet banking. Also, this system may have developed here because Brazil´s postal service is much less user friendly than the one in the U.S. The Brazilian PO is dependable and reliable in terms of making deliveries, but it is much less friendly when you want to mail something (like a payment). There are no drop boxes around town and the postage rates, as near as I can tell, are not set in any way that would allow you to slap a stamp on an envelope and feel comfortable sliding it into a mail slot.

To be fair, on-line banking is available in Brazil for making payments, but it is not quite as easy to set up as it is in the U.S., or at least as it was in the U.S. way back when I started using it. Heitor uses it and one of these days I need to get his help in getting me set up too.

What prompted this post was the recent experience of having my U.S. credit card declined at a pharmacy website where I have used it for five years. I have had the experience in the past with other on-line retailers of having my U.S. card refused for on-line purchases, but having it accepted for the same purchase when made in the store. While all this is frustrating when it happens, it reflects an internet security consciousness one is loathe to criticize.

When my credit card was disallowed for the pharmacy purchase, I discovered one of those things that has been right in front of my eyes for years. Many, perhaps most, on-line retailers allow you to print out an invoice with a bar code and trot over to the bank (a five minute trot for me) and pay it. This seems to me an option that, if it were available in the U.S., would appeal to many people who have a lurking fear of making credit card purchases on the internet. We hear stories of the horrible hassles people have had to endure because of credit card fraud and/or identity theft and we worry that sooner or later it is in store for all of us.

My Brazilian bank´s debit card would also function as a credit card if I just went through the process of setting it up. But I wouldn´t have discovered this ability to print out an invoice if my U.S. card hadn´t been declined.

Is It Any Wonder People Cheat?

It doesn't pay to follow the rules. Heitor and I recently made a purchase (not books) on Amazon and had the order shipped directly to us here in São Paulo because we were under the impression there is no import tax on values of less that US $50.

In this case, the cost of the product was $15.49 and shipping was $11.72. The total of $27.21 was calculated by Brazilian customs to be the equivalent of R$ 65.15 (using a better exchange rate than I get, I should point out).

On this purchase, we paid an import tax of R$63.41. The tax was calculated, either from stupidity in the customs office or because of the law, on both the cost of the product and the cost of the freight and came to virtually 100%., to state the obvious.

For a $15.49 product, we ended up paying $53.70.

On the bright side, it was just what we wanted...priceless

Saturday, August 24, 2013

The United States of ALEC

I wish everyone could see the Bill Moyers show called "The United States of ALEC."  The program is several months old, but nothing has happened since it was shown to make it less relevant. Perhaps it is available if you check on the PBS or Bill Moyers websites. I downloaded it illegally, but without guilt; I'm reasonably sure that doing so doesn't take bread out of the mouths of either babes or old guys like Moyers. On the contrary, I'm confident they would be happy to see it being distributed.

The main trouble with the ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, which happens to be celebrating its 40th anniversary right about now, is not that it exists (although I think the connection between legislators and moneyed interests is anti-democratic) but that the organization enjoys tax-free status (now there's an IRS scandal for those who want one) and does not have to register as a lobbying group.

As Steve Farley, the minority leader in the Arizona House of Representatives put it, while arguing for his proposed ALEC Accountability Act which would have required legislators to disclose their ALEC membership:
I just want to emphasize it’s fine for corporations to be involved in the process. Corporations have the right to present their arguments, but they don’t have the right to do it secretly. They don’t have the right to lobby people and not register as lobbyists. They don’t have the right to take people away on trips, convince them of it, send them back here, and then nobody has seen what’s gone on and how that legislator had gotten that idea and where is it coming from. All I’m asking... is to make sure that all of those expenses are reported as if they are lobbying expenses and all those gifts that legislators received are reported as if they’re receiving gifts from lobbyists. So the public can find out and make up their own minds about who is influencing what.
He's the minority leader and his proposal went nowhere, of course.

Wasting Time




Thank gawd Brazilians aren't so narrow minded (although they too can be bad at spelling).


Ok, he loses points for omitting an apostrophe, and spelling isn't his thing. But his concept is a 10.





To Protect and Serve

I am not an absolutist on many things,believe it or not, but I am as close to one as is possible when it comes to the 4th amendment. Absolutely nobody should be subject to having his or her property seized unless as the result of a conviction in court.

It is easy and attractive to start cutting corners with forfeiture laws because you only want to ignore the constitution to go after bad guys, like drug king pins and organized crime figures. Seems reasonable; it is easy to conclude that these scumbags don't deserve any constitutional considerations.

But, first, there is no disclaimer that the constitution does not apply to scumbags and assholes (either presumed or proven). Second, the police make mistakes in the identification of scumbags and assholes (just as they make mistakes in the identification of terrorists). And, finally, anytime you give this kind of discretionary power to the police, it will be abused in totally unforeseen ways, guaranteed.

Also absolutely nobody should have their person violated at the discretionary whim of an officer who has to pass no higher hurdle than to say he thought he smelled marijuana.

This video is tough to watch, but it is indicative of the way in which the 4th amendment, that prevents unlawful search, is taking a beating these days. This happens to be from Texas again. There are other video examples of similar activities in Texas. Yes, there have been lawsuits filed. Some of the officers involved have been fired and/or suspended. At least one has been reinstated. That isn't the point. Police need to know without a doubt (period, paragraph!) that this is not acceptable policy.

You might note in this video that the officers who supposedly smelled marijuana did not appear to make much of a search in the car itself. Apparently Texas police assume recreational pot smokers always put their unused stash up their asses or vaginas.

You will also note that the officer conducting the search did not change gloves between women or between body orifices.

The settlement in this lawsuit should bust the freaking state budget as far as I'm concerned.

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Gawd Bless 'Em

Don't forget to visit theonion.com once in a while to see the stories you've been missing.

Mother Surprised Son Needs So Much Ammunition For First Day Of School


Obama Deeply Concerned After Syrians Gassed To Death On White House Lawn


Congress Fiercely Divided Over Completely Blank Bill That Says And Does Nothing


Economists Advise Nation’s Poor To Invent The Next Facebook


David McCullough Wondering How Much Scratch He Could Shake Out Of Frederick Douglass



Life In These United States

Amendment 4 of the constitution seems fairly explicit and straightforward, with none of that charming 2nd Amendment ambiguity:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
There is an eye-opening article by Sarah Stillman in the August 12th-19th issue of the New Yorker describing a legal procedure called civil forfeiture which renders these words absolutely meaningless. You do not have to be convicted of a crime. You do not even have to be charged with a crime! But the police can seize your home, your car, your cash...anything. And surprise, surprise, it is used disproportionately against the poor and minorities. If you're the coach of the Philadelphia Eagles, you have nothing to worry about. (If you want an explanation of that, you'll have to read the article.)

In the twisted logic of forfeiture law as it is applied, property does not have the same legal rights as do people. So you end up with absurd Kafkaesque cases with titles like The United States v. One Pearl Necklace or The State of Texas v. $6,037.

The laws authorizing these seizures go back to the '70s and '80s and they were enacted to target organized crime bosses and drug kingpins. As Civil Libertarians warned us at the time, the short-circuiting of the constitutional legal process is a mistake. Always a mistake. You cut a corner here; you cut a corner there....

Now we have law enforcement entities that rely on forfeitures for a large percentage of their funding, and personnel whose bonuses are funded from forfeitures.

John Boehner and his colleagues want to be measured on how many laws they repeal. Here is something they should go to work on immediately. They should be able to get bi-partisan support.


Tuesday, August 20, 2013

He Had Way With Words

Apropos of nothing more than the fact that The Nation has a new ebook available with 12 of Kurt Vonnegut´s contributions over the years, and the fact that I agree with his opinions about America´s wars of choice, here are some Vonnegut quotes:
By saying that our leaders are power-drunk chimpanzees, am I in danger of wrecking the morale of our soldiers fighting and dying in the Middle East? Their morale, like so many bodies, is already shot to pieces. They are being treated, as I never was, like toys a rich kid got for Christmas.
The only difference between Hitler and Bush is that Hitler was elected.
I myself feel that our country, for whose Constitution I fought in a just war, might as well have been invaded by Martians and body snatchers. Sometimes I wish it had been. What has happened, though, is that it has been taken over by means of the sleaziest, low-comedy, Keystone Cops-style coup d'etat imaginable. And those now in charge of the federal government are upper-crust C-students who know no history or geography, plus not-so-closeted white supremacists, aka 'Christians,' and plus, most frighteningly, psychopathic personalities, or 'PPs
When asked how he was doing at the start of a 2003 interview, he replied: 
I'm mad about being old and I'm mad about being American. Apart from that, OK.
With regard to the 2004 Bush-Kerry contest:
No matter which one wins, we will have a Skull and Bones President at a time when entire vertebrate species, because of how we have poisoned the topsoil, the waters and the atmosphere, are becoming, hey presto, nothing but skulls and bones.

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Time Knows Its Audience, I Guess

Presumably when all that remains is the on line edition, we´ll all get the same stories.

time

time2

time1

time4

time3




Monday, August 5, 2013

Unfortunately the Sensible Republicans Aren't Party Leaders

Four former Republican EPA administrators who collectively served in that position for about fifteen years, under presidents Nixon, Reagan, Bush and The Shrub, jointly published an op-ed piece a few days ago to argue that the U.S. must not only admit the reality of climate change but take "substantive steps to curb climate change, at home and internationally."

They note approvingly president Obama's use of executive action and regulatory powers in his recently-announced climate action plan.
Rather than argue against his proposals, our leaders in Congress should endorse them and start the overdue debate about what bigger steps are needed and how to achieve them — domestically and internationally.
 Mr. Obama’s plan is just a start. More will be required. But we must continue efforts to reduce the climate-altering pollutants that threaten our planet. The only uncertainty about our warming world is how bad the changes will get, and how soon. What is most clear is that there is no time to waste.

Sunday, August 4, 2013

Humbling Experiences

When Heitor first used the term "race film" a few weeks ago, I had to ask him exactly he meant. And it was good that I did, because it is a term with a reasonably precise definition, with just a hint of fuzziness around the edges. 

It is always humbling to learn aspects of american cultural history from Heitor. It was equally humbling to mention the subject to my erudite friend Eric and have him respond, without skipping a beat, with the name of Oscar Micheaux, the most well known director in this genre. I'm not surprised that Eric knew about Micheaux; I am well accustomed to the fact that Eric is a font of information about most things cultural. What flustered me was that he didn't even have the decency to stumble around for a few seconds trying to find the name buried somewhere in his memory. It was right there.

During the last couple of weeks a cultural center downtown had a showing of some of these old films which still survive, and last night there was a lecture/discussion about them with a professor from Columbia University. And this was humbling too, because the guy spoke what I considered perfect Porutuguese. He gave his lecture and did the entire q and a session without an interpreter. Damn! Heitor, trying to be nice, assured me the guy's Portuguese wasn't perfect, that he used a few Spanish words as well as a few false cognates. 

But I loved his fearlessness, whether he was speaking perfectly or not. And I understood him. As far as I was concerned, he was the best Portuguese speaker in the room. It reminds me what one of my former advanced students said, i.e.it was much easier for him to have conversations in English with people for whom English was a second or third language. I felt like I could have spoken some kind of bastardized Portuguese with this guy all day long.

Final humbling experience of the night. After the lecture, the professor, the curator of the show, a representative from the U.S. consulate and Heitor went out for dinner and drinks. Because no other partners or spouses were represented, I chose to come home and order Chinese food. The woman taking the order on the phone, having trouble understanding me, asked "do you speak English?"






Thursday, August 1, 2013

Life in a Parallel Universe



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                        JULY 22, 2013
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE ORGANIZERS AND MEMBERS OF “THE TEA
PARTY.NET” AND “TEA PARTY NATION” FROM THE UNITED KENTUCKY TEA
PARTY
Your recent endorsements of Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell took the grassroots
Tea Parties in Kentucky by surprise. In fact, we are absolutely amazed at your lack of
research and poor judgment.
Senator McConnell voted for every debt ceiling increase under George W. Bush, TARP,
CAFTA, NAFTA, the1986 Amnesty bill, Biden/McConnell fiscal cliff deal 2013, Patriot act
and NDAA.
.
Senator McConnell’s Progressive Liberal voting record, his absolute iron fisted rule over
the Republican Party in Kentucky and his willingness to roll over and cede power to
President Obama and the Liberals in Washington, prove that he is no friend to the
American people or the citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
Your endorsement undermines the work of the real grassroots Tea Party organizations
all over Kentucky. Had you taken the time to reach out to us, you would have learned
that the Tea Parties in Kentucky do NOT support Senator McConnell’s campaign.
The undersigned Kentucky grass roots Tea Parties request that you withdraw your
recommendation of Senator McConnell and join us in working to replace him with a true
Conservative who will uphold Tea Party values.
Respectfully
Scott Hofstra
Spokesperson