Trolleyology and the Value of Human Lives

George Rebane

For decades we have seen those yellow diamond shaped signs in the back windows of cars admonishing us to ‘Drive Carefully, Baby Aboard’.  Years ago as a young father, I puzzled over the first such sign that I spied.  Its message was clear, ‘this car is transporting a human whose life is worth more than that of the run-of-mill human life, therefore extra effort should be made to preserve it’.  I recall that a moment’s reflection made me say to myself, no it ain’t.  A couple of thoughts later I concluded that in the larger scheme of things that baby’s life is worth less than the run-of-mill lives we all encounter in the daily round, including our own.

Most certainly that conclusion is true if we consider the baby’s ‘replacement value’ – you can make a new one in nine months – or its worth to society in the investment made, or the investment still required to civilize the little guy and educate him to productivity.

In my way of reasoning, I thought a more appropriate sign in the back window should read ‘Drive Carefully, A STEM Worker Aboard’, or ‘…, An Established Taxpayer Aboard’, or something similar.  It was clear to me that of all the other more demonstrably accomplished lives driving down a crowded freeway, the babies strapped into their car seats represented the least valuable expressions of humanity when viewed from the larger perspective of a community or society in general.

And from that greater vantage, societies have historically vindicated that valuation in how they have chosen to treat their young – depriving them of liberties and other social franchises, working them at the lowest compensation rates, and sending them to bear the brunt of battles.  After all, as a resource, in them we are least invested, they are still ignorant and malleable (willing to sacrifice themselves for glory), and their replacement cost is minimal.  (more here)

The received wisdom is that human life is precious beyond compense.  But that is patently false since daily we allow bureaucrats to exercise public policies in ways that allows any numerate person to compute the marginal dollar value we put on different kinds of lives.  For example, how many more miles of life-saving concrete center dividers could we have emplaced for the cost of highway landscaping or decorative sound walls?  We can compute the expected lives so saved, and attribute the cost of alternative spending across those lives to get a dollar worth of a life we are willing to expend in order to enjoy a more beautiful roadside.  And you haven’t seen anything yet until we sharpen our pencils to run some numbers on the decisions made in dispensing Obamacare.

Philosophers, sociologists, and other thinkers have considered the problem of the relative worth of human life within questions of social ethics and morality.  A popular category of thought problems in this endeavor is called ‘trolleyology’ of which there are now many variants that have been posed and debated.  The basic trolleyology problem involves a runaway trolley heading toward five unsuspecting workers on the track who will surely be killed if the trolley continues on its intended path.  But there is a possibility of diverting the trolley onto a side track on which is standing one unsuspecting hapless human.  The decision maker may be the trolley driver or someone on the sidelines who can switch the track.  What is the right thing to do in this case, let the trolley proceed to kill the five, or divert it to kill the one?

A much discussed version involves a very obese man standing by the track whose body can slow/stop the trolley if he is shoved into the trolley’s path.  What is the proper action for a bystander who can push the unsuspecting fat man, and sacrifice him to save the five?  How will/should society judge the person who then sacrificed that one to save many?

Such questions are not just idle thought experiments for the intellectually effete.  Their analogues are posed and answered every day, especially in the annals of healthcare, law enforcement, the military, and in our criminal and civil justice systems.

Is there a way to answer such questions that is better than the ad hoc, arbitrary, and haphazard way we now answer them?  Should we develop a ‘calculus of morality’ or adopt some formalism about computing the relative worth or rankings of human lives, e.g. the mortality and morbidity utility posed in ‘Healthcare Utility Metric (with scriptural underpinnings)’?  Some argue that this should not be done because that puts humans into the role of playing God.  But then, a moment’s thought shows that we constantly play an arbitrary God with people’s lives, and have done so throughout human history.

These questions are increasingly relevant as the world has become more populated, inter-connected, and relatively ignorant.  Of course, the easiest course forward is to forget the whole issue and just soldier on as we have been, using all the tools available from politics, cronyism, and corruption.

Comments

[Ben Emery]

It kind seems like a different angle on Tort Reform debate. I different way of looking at it is those who were slaves or live in absolute destitution, why would they get up and participate in life everyday? There is no adequate price on a human life.

[Todd Juvinall]

George you must have eaten a lot of turkey and fixins yesterday. This is the age old dilemma of values. In Christianity every human being has a value incalculable in money but on the planet earth we see that is not true. Men have been cannon fodder forever. Mostly young men directed by old men. The state trains them in the art of killing, sends them into the field and they end up getting killed. We have always had wars and mostly to secure property. But as we see now there are religions in the middle east that value life as simply a mechanism to achieve nirvana and 72 virgins. (Since they started using women bombers do they get 72 dudes?)

Anyway, life is easy to create by men and women but it is the training of the offspring and their resultant affects on society that we must measure their value.

Is a man who murders others and is then placed in a jail where the cost per year is $54,000 a better way to spend society's money? Or should we have swift justice with an effective death penalty and then spenf the savings on young people in college?

With a complex set of values, humans will always be to muddled to have a final set of answers. In Africa, millions die every year from the decision of first world countries to not allow DDT to be used to kill mosquitos carrying malaria. So I would guess the decision must be the ethics regarding the life of those tiny African babies are truly hypocritical by the eco-liberals of the planet. More later.

[rlcrabb]

Oh yeah, I remember those "Baby On Board" signs. I'd always exercise caution around those vehicles. On the other hand, I was always tempted to run those off the road that had a Garfield doll staring at me from the window.

[Walt]

Sorry I'm late,, Hope everyone had a safe Thanksgiving.

[Ben Emery]

I like the real answer Todd and am finding myself in agreement for the most part.

[Joe Koyote]

" In Africa, millions die every year from the decision of first world countries to not allow DDT to be used to kill mosquitos carrying malaria." It is not that simple Todd. Yes DDT kills mosquitos. That is a short term solution to malaria. However, any cost/benefit analysis should also consider the long term health problems (cancers etc.) and costs due to the use of DDT. It is banned for reasons that go beyond appeasing the political agenda of "eco-liberals." The real question, once the political BS gets swept aside, is "does the short term solution justify the long term consequences?"

[George Rebane]

The use of DDT is a good proxy for discussing the (politically correct) value of human life. There is a sober summary of the DDT debate on this NIH site.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2821864/

The summary concludes - In 1972, following his review of seven months and more than 9,000 pages of federal testimony, William Ruckelshaus, head of the newly formed Environmental Protection Agency, canceled DDT's registration in the U.S. The ban answered the policy question of whether DDT should be used in the U.S.; it did not, however, answer the scientific question of whether DDT was safe for humans or the environment.28 Ruckelshaus's written opinion on the rule stated that DDT's potential carcinogenicity figured prominently in his final decision to ban the chemical.32 But DDT's potential to harm human health remained just that: a possibility. EDF celebrated the rule as a victory. However, for the next 10 years, Wurster and Jukes continued to write heated letters and articles debating the risks and benefits of DDT. The scientific debate, replete with its social and ethical overlays, was anything but resolved—as it remains unto the present day.

My own view is that the political advances made by the predominantly leftwing environmentalists to advance their own political agenda have far outweighed any consideration of saving human lives. As can be deduced from the cited summary, there is no clear or conclusive evidence that DDT is harmful to humans, most certainly not nearly to the extent that the annual death rate from mosquito borne malaria is. The presumed DDT death rates are microscopic when compared to malaria. Since DDT is the cheapest and most effective malaria preventative, it is clear that 'the easiest course forward is to forget the whole issue and just soldier on as we have been, using all the tools available from politics, cronyism, and corruption.'

[Ben Emery]

Joe,
A mass investment of mosquito nets could drastically reduce malaria. One person a minute die everyday from malaria. I wanted to be agreeable so didn't address DDT comment. An optimistic analysis of the DDT policy would be not understanding the side effects of covering human beings with a chemical product that was going to kill another living thing. Nets makes no large corporation large sums of profit and can last much longer than a single season so there is no need for constant purchasing of the anti malaria product. Those like Gates foundation could invest a very small % of their personal wealth and would almost eradicate malaria. But they choose instead a piece meal approach that allows a major health issue to remain while getting huge PR by donating just enough to sound like a big investment, thus making the organization and Melinda Gates like decent human beings. I will quote my new favorite world leader on the effects of corruption in public and private sectors.

POPE FRANCIS

MORNING MEDITATION IN THE CHAPEL OF THE
DOMUS SANCTAE MARTHAE

Dirty bread of corruption

Friday, 8 November 2013

Closing
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/cotidie/2013/en/papa-francesco-cotidie_20131108_dirty-bread_en.html

The Holy Father concluded by inviting all of those present “to ask the Lord to change the hearts of those who are devoted to the goddess of bribery” in order that “they might understand that dignity comes from noble work, from honest work, from daily work, and not from the easy road which in the end strips you of everything”. For when they face death, he said, “these poor people who lose their dignity through the practice of bribery do not take with them the money they earned; they only take their lack of dignity. Let us pray for them.

[Todd Juvinall]

The person you need to talk to JoeK is a local fellow named Patrick Hurley. He is a chemical engineer I think. He is an expert on DDT. Margaret Carlson's book "Silent Spring" was the biggest piece of eco crapola to hit the planet since the asteroids. But it worked and convinced the mincemeat brained EPA and other eco liberals that we cannot have the chemical. So, millions have died, mostly little munchcins and mostly black. So I get you on this. You do not care for those little black children perishing from the second most preventable killer on the planet. If you disagree, please supply the peer reviewed science proving you correct.

[stevenfrisch]

All of this nonsense about DDT might make some sense, if any of what Todd and others are sayings were true.

But of course, it IS NOT.

DDT is not banned, it is simply in much more limited use; DDT use is allowed under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants approved by more than 150 countries including the very countries Todd is alluding to who have persistent malaria problems; according to the WHO the reason DDT is less effective today is that Mosquitos have built resistance to the chemical, and Malathion is much more effective. DDT is still in use in the rare cases where it is proven to be effective.

I would post peer reviewed science, but really do you think Todd would really accept any peer reviewed science? or know how to read it?

Oh, and it was Rachel Carson the American marine biologist who wrote Silent Spring, not Margaret Carlson, the newspaper columnist and editor.

[stevenfrisch]

Another stupid right wing myth busted!

[stevenfrisch]

Oh yeah, without the use of DDT there were a grand total of 1,925 malaria cases in the United States, almost all of which were contracted overseas, and a total of 5 deaths.

http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2013/p1031-malaria-cases.html

[stevenfrisch]

Posted by: stevenfrisch | 29 November 2013 at 08:38 PM

Those figures were for 2010.

[Todd Juvinall]

Frisch, we are talking about Africa. Get with the agenda you fool.

[George Rebane]

Administrivia - I draw your kind attention to the 29nov13 update of 'Crickets vindicate ...'
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2013/11/crickets-vindicate-erroneous-charges.html

[stevenfrisch]

Listen you frigging moron, I know we are talking abut Africa. George's article dealt with the United States so I gave some US figures.

DDT is not banned in Africa, you are full of shinola; it is covered under the Stockholm Convention and is used in about 10 countries in Africa right now. All of the data I posted above is accurate.

I ask the good readers to go look it up and decide for themselves who is full of crap.

You just constantly repeat the bullshit you hear with no thought.

[Gerry Fedor]

I love it when Todd call us all fools, this is the guy who claims to be a financial wiz (he's certainly a wiz alright) yet, he lets his investment property go into foreclosure which is then had to use TARP money to cover his mistake.

Then he tells us all how we should run the financial system, when he's part of the problem.....

NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE Trustee Sale No. : 20100015009237 Title Order No.: 100551675 FHA/VA/PMI No.: YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST, DATED 03/07/2008. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. NDEX WEST, LLC, as duly appointed Trustee under and pursuant to Deed of Trust Recorded on 03/14/2008 as Instrument No. 2008-0006162-00 of official records in the office of the County Recorder of NEVADA County, State of CALIFORNIA. EXECUTED BY: TODD JUVINALL, WILL SELL AT PUBLIC AUCTION TO HIGHEST BIDDER FOR CASH, CASHIER’S CHECK/CASH EQUIVALENT or other form of payment authorized by 2924h(b), (payable at time of sale in lawful money of the United States). DATE OF SALE: 02/03/2011 TIME OF SALE: 12:30 PM PLACE OF SALE: AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE COURTHOUSE, 201 CHURCH STREET, NEVADA CITY, CA. STREET ADDRESS and other common designation, if any, of the real property described above is purported to be: 15994 LAZULI LN, GRASS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 95949 APN#: 23-250-41 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address and other common designation, if any , shown herein. Said sale will be made, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by said Deed of Trust, with interest thereon, as provided in said note(s), advances, under the terms of said Deed of Trust, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee and of the trusts created by said Deed of Trust. The total amount of the unpaid balance of the obligation secured by the property to be sold and reasonable estimated costs, expenses and advances at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale is $431,294.16. The beneficiary under said Deed of Trust heretofore executed and delivered to the undersigned a written Declaration of Default and Demand for Sale, and a written Notice of Default and Election to Sell. The undersigned caused said Notice of Default and Election to Sell to be recorded in the county where the real property is located. FOR TRUSTEE SALE INFORMATION PLEASE CALL: AGENCY SALES & POSTING 3210 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE 200 IRVINE, CA 92602 714-730-2727 http://www.lpsasap.com NDEx West, L.L.C. MAY BE ACTING AS A DEBT COLLECTOR ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT. ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. NDEx West, L.L.C. as Trustee Dated: 01/07/2011 NDEx West, L.L.C. 15000 Surveyor Boulevard, Suite 500 Addison, Texas 75001-9013 Telephone: (866) 795-1852 Telecopier: (972) 661-7800 ASAP# 3876828

So our Wise and Just friend, exactly home much of my money did you cost us all?

[Todd Juvinall]

As we can read theFrisch above, he resorts to namecalling as usual. But his points are bogus as we can all read for ourselves the following links and articles on DDT. So who is the moron now? Methinks a Truckee fellow.

HERE is a current article on DDT that mirrors my comments and debunks the moron Steve Frisch. He is the master of cut and paste and is totally wrong on this issue. Please note the current estimated death totals of black African children. My guess is this means the liberal attempts at eugenics through the banned use of saving chemicals is supported by theFrisch.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/15583-ddt-breeds-death

My favorite point from the above article as follows:
“The Stockholm Convention, which went into force in 2004, legally binds most UN-participant nations to “take actions to reduce or eliminate the production, use and/or release” of DDT. Meanwhile thousands die needlessly every day, and though Americans do not witness firsthand this overseas genocide, the resurgence of mosquito-borne West Nile Virus in the United States could soon demand a DDT renaissance.”

Here is a simple search on Google and an article from 2004

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_ddt01.htm
Here is a CDC article stating that 10 African nations asked for an exemption from its banning use. (note that they do not produce DDT) This is from 2003.

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/9/8/03-0082_article.htm

I found any other articles and studies to back up my contention. TheFrisch does have a couple of points that are true but he expands those points with further disinformation. That is how liberals lie and how they try to win debates. While little black children are dying every day from these diseases, the Frisch and his ilk sleep well.

[stevenfrisch]

Hey Todd, did you read the CDC article form 9/8/03? It supports my point.

The second to the last article is from Lyndon LaRouche...a great source for you Todd, so much for 'peer reviewed' science.

Even the article from the New Statesman supports my point, notice the "reduce or eliminate"; the Stockholm Convention does not ban DDT.

And nothing you have posted counters the facts sourced by me above that DDT has lost effectiveness due to resistance built up by Mosquitos....which is why people need to use Malathion...which is more expensive.

What you have posted not only makes no sense it is intentional propaganda bullshit parroted by a dimwitted yokel. I expect as much from you, you can't help yourself, but I expect other readers here to go to the sources and see for themselves that you are full of crap.

[Ben Emery]

http://www.fightingmalaria.org/
This is a link that lays out malaria in Africa.

The real question is how is it the continent and nations most rich in natural resource is so poor and unable to afford good malaria reduction policies on their own?

[Todd Juvinall]

Frisch we are simply in a battle for truth and you are losing.

[George Rebane]

Well, I guess the DDT detour served as something more concrete to focus on than considering the divers ways we value human life. Apropos to DDT et al and African human life, no one really cares - perhaps Bill Gates with a miniscule fraction of his foundation's gonza assets. But not the rest of us.

Here in the west we babble about 'social justice' without having a clue about its definition or how to measure it. Social justice is what the loudest political voice says it is, and tomorrow it may be convenient to say it's something else. That socially just policies implicitly value human life in real terms (e.g. QoL, dollar cost per remaining year, etc) is undeniable, but the valuations are arbitrary, inconsistent, capricious, and gratuitous in terms of the lives affected, and make sense only when examined in the light of near term benefits to the ruling elites.

[Walt]

How well did DDT work? Dig into the history of the Panama canal.
How many dead because of insect deaths alone? If it wasn't for DDT,
I don't believe the canal would have been finished.

Now just to add a poke with a pointy stick,, liberalism may be another
unforeseen side effect of DDT.. ( Kinda like the soft egg shell of the Calif. Condor DDT is blamed for as well)
parents sent their kids into the streets to play as the DDT fumigators
drove down the Avenue." Get a good dusting kids!"
Yes,,, from " soft shelled eggs" to soft shelled heads... Make it mandatory
for a person that leans Left needs a bike helmet. We don't want that "soft shell" to get anymore damaged than it already is. Obamacare isn't working yet.

[Todd Juvinall]

What is truly fascinating about people like TheFrisch is there hypocrisy regarding human life. Well, life they don't care about. Rather than discuss the "on the ground" facts of African children, whether dead by insects or rapacious males seeking to avoid AIDS, the Frisch chastises about the misspelling or named wrong authors. No affection for the many tykes dying by the millions. But, if we discuss AB32 or "global warming" now that perks the interest of the left. Forget the little ones. But when a person has no heirs maybe that is what happens to the brain.

[fish]

But, if we discuss AB32 or "global warming" now that perks the interest of the left.

C'mon Todd millions dying in Africa....where's the money in that? "Global Warming", "Climate Change" or whatever the marketing department is calling it this week on the other hand......well that has the potential to be a real revenue generator for the state! Look there and find Mr. Frischs motivation.

[stevenfrisch]

Posted by: Walt | 30 November 2013 at 10:29 AM

"If it wasn't for DDT, I don't believe the canal would have been finished."

Panama Canal finished and opened: AUGUST 1914

DDT insecticide uses discovered: 1939
by Swiss chemist Paul Hermann Muller (for which he won the Nobel prize in 1948)

Too much WOLDNET DAILY, TOWN HALL and THE BLAZE makes you stud boys.

[Todd Juvinall]

I was going to give Walt the correct info but I knew theFrisch couldn't wait.

The Panama Canal mosquito problem was solved by pouring oil over exposed water in containers and spraying over larger areas in order to smother the eggs.

[fish]

Too much WOLDNET DAILY, TOWN HALL and THE BLAZE makes you stud boys.

I guess you're right Todd...Steve does have a thing" for you! Stud boys....nice!

[stevenfrisch]

Boy I hate my automatic spell checker especially when it makes STUPID look like STUD.

By the way, one of the number one causes of the spread of malaria? You guessed it: climate change.

http://www.who.int/globalchange/climate/summary/en/index5.html

Oh and Todd, you mistaking Rachel Carson for Margaret Carlson was my way of showing the readers here that you don;t fact check shit. Just like Walt, who apparently thinks DDT helped build the Panama Canal!

[Todd Juvinall]

fish, you are so right. The eco groups in our country don't seem to raise money for the children in the world but I do see them raising money for their tried and true "big cats are endangered" strategies. I have noticed in my lifetime of watching the grant takers and rent seekers like theFrisch that when funds for their office expenses are low they put the "big cats" out there. Too predictable now. My hopes are the public donors will cut them off.

[fish]

Oh and Todd, you mistaking Rachel Carson for Margaret Carlson was my way of showing the readers here that you don;t fact check shit.

Substituting an often heard name for a somewhat more "remote" name isn't evidence of anything Steve.

[stevenfrisch]

But I note Fish: I have presented facts and references. Todd has presented opinions unsubstantiated and provably and proven false. What is the responsibility of posters here to post the truth? or fact check their data? or hold those who post accountable for accuracy? I guess there is no accountability.

[Walt]

Yup,, I stand corrected. ( as far as Panama is concerned) But not one word
on the "OIL" that was used? Our Greeny missed a chance to fly off the handle. ( Uhhh,, dude.... You forgot to sight your source of the cut and paste job... Wiki??)

[fish]

But I note Fish: I have presented facts and references. Todd has presented opinions unsubstantiated and provably and proven false. What is the responsibility of posters here to post the truth? or fact check their data? or hold those who post accountable for accuracy? I guess there is no accountability.

My counter to your assertion was only that simple confusion of two names isn't evidence of anything. You can go full Ben Emery and post links until the sun dims and I probably won't check because so much of the science is politicized these days and I find that you and your side is just as guilty of arguing in bad faith as you claim your opponents to be.

Listen you frigging moron..I ask the good readers to go look it up and decide for themselves who is full of crap.....You just constantly repeat the bullshit you hear with no thought.

I do love it when the high minded lefty mask slips! I'm glad you're back Steve..you belong here.

[fish]

I love it when Todd call us all fools, this is the guy who claims to be a financial wiz (he's certainly a wiz alright) yet, he lets his investment property go into foreclosure which is then had to use TARP money to cover his mistake.

Then he tells us all how we should run the financial system, when he's part of the problem.....

NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE Trustee Sale No. : 20100015009237 Title Order No.: 100551675 FHA/VA/PMI No.: YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST, DATED 03/07/2008. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. NDEX WEST, LLC, as duly appointed Trustee under and pursuant to Deed of Trust Recorded on 03/14/2008 as Instrument No. 2008-0006162-00 of official records in the office of the County Recorder of NEVADA County, State of CALIFORNIA. EXECUTED BY: TODD JUVINALL, WILL SELL AT PUBLIC AUCTION TO HIGHEST BIDDER FOR CASH, CASHIER’S CHECK/CASH EQUIVALENT or other form of payment authorized by 2924h(b), (payable at time of sale in lawful money of the United States). DATE OF SALE: 02/03/2011 TIME OF SALE: 12:30 PM PLACE OF SALE: AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE COURTHOUSE, 201 CHURCH STREET, NEVADA CITY, CA. STREET ADDRESS and other common designation, if any, of the real property described above is purported to be: 15994 LAZULI LN, GRASS VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 95949 APN#: 23-250-41 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address and other common designation, if any , shown herein. Said sale will be made, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by said Deed of Trust, with interest thereon, as provided in said note(s), advances, under the terms of said Deed of Trust, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee and of the trusts created by said Deed of Trust. The total amount of the unpaid balance of the obligation secured by the property to be sold and reasonable estimated costs, expenses and advances at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale is $431,294.16. The beneficiary under said Deed of Trust heretofore executed and delivered to the undersigned a written Declaration of Default and Demand for Sale, and a written Notice of Default and Election to Sell. The undersigned caused said Notice of Default and Election to Sell to be recorded in the county where the real property is located. FOR TRUSTEE SALE INFORMATION PLEASE CALL: AGENCY SALES & POSTING 3210 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE 200 IRVINE, CA 92602 714-730-2727 http://www.lpsasap.com NDEx West, L.L.C. MAY BE ACTING AS A DEBT COLLECTOR ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT. ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. NDEx West, L.L.C. as Trustee Dated: 01/07/2011 NDEx West, L.L.C. 15000 Surveyor Boulevard, Suite 500 Addison, Texas 75001-9013 Telephone: (866) 795-1852 Telecopier: (972) 661-7800 ASAP# 3876828

So our Wise and Just friend, exactly home much of my money did you cost us all?

Welcome back Michael......I like your sockpuppet "Gerry"!

[stevenfrisch]

Yeah, you have a problem with looking stuff up Walt? The source of my knowledge of the Panama Canal was reading two histories. But you know what? A combination of looking things up on the web, coupled with checking the original sources, and skepticism about the veracity of sources leading to seeking more than one or two, could really go a long ways toward getting your stuff straight. Nothing wrong with reading.

[George Rebane]

re stevenfrisch 1124am and 1159am - apparently Mr Frisch doesn't even read his own propaganda citations. There is no claim in those that climate change is already "one of the number one causes of the spread of malaria". Far from it, the bullshit WHO articles presume that in a future world of runaway temperature increases in insect borne diseases like malaria will occur. There we read "Climate change will also affect infectious disease occurrence (1)." Going to (1) we read further that detecting increases in current incidences of diseases like malaria is a highly unreliable (noisy) undertaking - outputs from more "sophisticated models" of processes we don't know how to model. And in sum "...there is now recognition that global climate change poses risks to human population health. ... This topic is emerging as a major theme in population health research, social policy development, and advocacy. Indeed, consideration of global climatic-environmental hazards to human health will become a central role in the sustainability transition debate." (emphases mine)

The rest of these reports are nothing but wordsmithing the politically correct interpretations of the latest dubious and debated IPCC outporings. Using these to connect the *claim* of already occurring changes in the incidence of diseases to (mis)predicted climate parameters is beyond specious.

[Todd Juvinall]

fsh, I think you have exposed the real Fedor! They simply make things up but hey, liberals do that. Too funny.

[Todd Juvinall]

George I knew you would set the record straight since you are the real scientist and theFrisch is a restaurant cook (as we recall The Passages in Truckee). The Frisch rejects our links but expects us to agree with his. Hubris.

fish, these guys on the left try and make a business foreclosure from five years ago a way to claim I cannot speak on finance. Don't they know that debt is finance? Sort of like PaulE saying I cannot speak on anything military since I did not serve. The left truly does not believe in free speech even though they yap about it all the time.

Regarding the foreclosure. I lost my money, no taxpayers were involved. But this is the attempt by the libs to try and claim something they think tarnishes me and my ability to discuss money. I would suggest a person who attends Burning Man and another who travels the Sierra counties promoting "global warming" are more dangerous than a retired contractor. Isn't it also interesting that "Gene Fedor" does not cite theFrisch's failure at restauranteur and hundreds of thousands of liens filed by the IRS, Franchise Tax Board and the County Treasurer. Why does Fedor not have an opinion on that? Oh, a fellow liar and liberal. Hilarious.

[stevenfrisch]

Yeah, well um, bullshit, George: "There is much evidence of associations between climatic conditions and infectious diseases. Malaria is of great public health concern, and seems likely to be the vector-borne disease most sensitive to long-term climate change." --WHO

See here is how it works, if you reject the reports from the WHO as inaccurate it is up to YOU to prove they are not. I am using a credible source...your contention that these are "politically correct interpretations" is what requires proof.

I mean really George, are you an expert of infectious decease? No, but the WHO is.

[stevenfrisch]

Yeah Fish, not back for long; just long enough to expose the stupid right wing talking point that restricting use of DDT is proof that 'liberals' do not care about 'black babies'.

It is a lie, pure and simple, has no basis in fact, the people arguing it don't have any real science on their side, and it is just more race baiting bullshit designed to give them a talking point.

You people should be ashamed of how you twist science. It is just pure ignorance.

[fish]

You people should be ashamed of how you twist science. It is just pure ignorance.

Cool....I get to use the "Pot meet Kettle" line twice in one week!

Hurry along now Steve.... there's a world in need of savin!

[George Rebane]

stevenfrisch 1256pm - Your implied claim that one needs to be a "an expert on infectious diseases" to comprehend and/or be an expert on the involved diffusion models, estimation algorithms, and data analysis that ground the claims of WHO is an understandable error almost always committed by members of the lay public.

The record is replete with the literally hundreds (thousands?) of recantations and post hoc 'clarifications' by the scientists who participated in the bits and pieces of the research that were ultimately assembled under the political auspices of the UN's IPCC (on anthropogenic global warming) and the UN's WHO (human morbidity and mortality issues). All of these specialists claimed only to construct and offer results from their narrow niches to be later assembled into the desired narrative by the star-powered, and since much discredited, head honchos like Hansen and Mann (under the beaming gaze of Gore and other unbiased global governance aficionados).

For example, epidemiology (along with most other disciplines in the modern life sciences, economics, finance, and sociology) draws ALL of its productive tools from what today is known as the systems sciences. To a systems scientist/engineer who assembles such large scale processing models that output *information* suitable for public policy decisions, the work of specialists like infectious disease experts at best yield localized (and almost always dubious and subsequently corrected) transfer functions of sub-processes that must be integrated into a whole that can compute usable results.

The output products of such specialists are useless to almost everyone not versed in such tools and the viewpoint required to productively apply them. Most certainly they are worse than useless to politicians and bureaucrats who inevitably attempt to make policies for pachyderm management from having at best hugged a specimen's hind leg.

In spite of all this Steve, your voice and considered arguments are always a welcome perspective on RR.

[fish]

Politics would never intrude on the sacred grounds of science........

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/muzzling-federal-scientists-widespread-survey-suggests-142739172.html

[fish]

fish, these guys on the left try and make a business foreclosure from five years ago a way to claim I cannot speak on finance. Don't they know that debt is finance? Sort of like PaulE saying I cannot speak on anything military since I did not serve. The left truly does not believe in free speech even though they yap about it all the time.

Last time I checked Todd if you couldn't pay the mortgage they foreclose on the property and your credit rating takes a hit. Standard contract language.

Michael....err..."Gerry" acts as though he's found photos of you having sex with a goat!

[stevenfrisch]

Posted by: George Rebane | 30 November 2013 at 02:05 PM

George, I never said one had to be an expert in infectious disease to refute the science, what I am saying is that if you are going to refute the science it is YOUR responsibility to refute the science, to provide the facts, or expose the specifics on the data that is incorrect, and the correction to the process that is necessary, not merely state that in the past some science at some place at some time on some issue has been proved incorrect and successfully refuted. One is evidence, and to be applauded if correct, the other is coincidence. The very idea that you as a self professed scientist would support such nonsense speculation.

[George Rebane]

stevenfrisch 241pm - OK, you may interpret your own 1256pm as you will. But the refutation that I gave to your citation(s) were a matter of simply understanding the English used to make WHO's claims which did not coincide with what you asserted in your 1124am. It was not at all a matter of proving or disproving science.

I apologize that my 205pm expansion on the generalized process of assembling large scale models from specialized sub-process models did not communicate well. (But this exchange does illuminate yet another facet of why debating politically splattered science is seldom fruitful, debating 'unscented' science is hard enough.)

[stevenfrisch]

Mad scientist George! You want to argue against the science do it with science, otherwise it is the pejorative form of ideology. In other words, bullshit.

[Todd Juvinall]

Ah yes, SteveF the restauranteur telling the actual scientist he is full of it. Priceless!

[Todd Juvinall]

fish, your pal MichaelA is trashing you on my blog. He states he is chicken to come to RR. Too funny!

[George Rebane]

stevenfrisch 456pm - my 304pm apology stands. The science you salute has been answered here and in more detail on cited websites. It is a matter of the widely understood and publicized debate between the subsidized globalists and the independent scientists. There is no profit here in resurrecting a circle jerk. In this neighborhood you shall ever be known as the avid proponent of AB32 and the opponent of Prop23, it is your indelible legacy built upon your understanding of and faith in the tenets of AGW. Perhaps you would care to add the advertised glories of Obamacare to that resume. In any event, let's give it a rest.

But I do invite your take on the subject of my post.

[stevenfrisch]

I chose instead to take on the junk science that you and Todd are advancing that 'liberals' are killing 'black babies' by opposing DDT.

All of the science points to the fact that DDT has diminished capacity to act as an insecticide against mosquitos; that other insecticides are more effective; that use of DDT in agricultural uses decreases its effectiveness as a disease control vector; and that in specialized cases where DDT IS USEUL it is not only allowed it is currently being used under the Stockholm Agreement.

In addition, DDT has been proven to have serious health effects, including a propensity to bioaccumulate, is considered a likely cause of numerous cancers including cancers of the liver, pancreas and breast. There is mixed evidence that it contributes to leukemia, lymphoma and testicular cancer.

Thus case that you are making is either a) unsupported by the science, or b) you choose not to use actual science to refute the claims.

In short you are either taking it as an convenient article of faith in order to make a political point or ignorant.

So you guys are lying to make a point. I call bullshit!

[George Rebane]

stevenfrisch 552pm - where have I "advanced" the case "that 'liberals' are killing 'black babies' by opposing DDT"? Making wild charges like that is your want, but it diminishes your credibility across the board.

[Gerry Fedor]

I find it rather funny as Todd want to convince us all that the tax payers didn't lose any money, when records show that he didn't make any payments for 1 year which comes to @$20K, then the house in question was sold by the lender for @$200k less than what was owed, and the money that was spent by the lender carrying this loan for 4 years @$65,000....

But no one lost any money? Is that your position my wise and just friend?

Bhahahahaha!

Thanks for the start to the holiday laughing season!

[Todd Juvinall]

I have no idea what you are talking about if you are talking about me MichaelA err.\, Gerry Fedor (an unknown person to boot) You are too funny!

[Todd Juvinall]

You know I could be wrong but the only other person with the foreclosure fervor was Steve Enos. Is Gerry SteveE?

[Ben Emery]

George,
30 November 2013 at 06:04 PM

My guess this is where Steve gets that idea. The context of the quote is we were talking about environmentalists opposing the use of DDT.

"My own view is that the political advances made by the predominantly leftwing environmentalists to advance their own political agenda have far outweighed any consideration of saving human lives."

Here is my take, you guys have a tendency to view issues through a financial lens and limited to the direct issue at hand neglecting to see other negative or positive effects. We need to look at the long term effects to the entire region vs mosquito's only. http://people.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/pest/effects.html

[George Rebane]

BenE 627pm - fair enough Ben; recall that all social issues derive their importance in our lives from their numbers, nothing else. Even the most progressive of you regularly foment policies which argue that making life a little better for the many is worth misery for the few - breaking eggs for omelets and all that (e.g. the intellectual basis for Obamacare). If you want to look at "the long term effects to the entire region", then we can formulate a utility function for that and see what policies may increase its value. And that discussion is guaranteed to be productive.

[fish]

I find it rather funny as Todd want to convince us all that the tax payers didn't lose any money, when records show that he didn't make any payments for 1 year which comes to @$20K, then the house in question was sold by the lender for @$200k less than what was owed, and the money that was spent by the lender carrying this loan for 4 years @$65,000....

But no one lost any money? Is that your position my wise and just friend?

Bhahahahaha!

Thanks for the start to the holiday laughing season!

Posted by: Gerry Fedor | 30 November 2013 at 06:10 PM

Who cares if the taxpayers lost money..... all the taxpayers do is lose money. Standard property contract language.....you don't make the payments you lose the property. FedGov intervened....how is that Todd's problem?

[Ben Emery]

George,
Lets define what you mean by social issues.

[fish]

Let's define what you mean by social issues

RELEASE THE PEDANT...........!!!!!

[George Rebane]

BenE 735pm - Given Mr fish's 742pm induced laughter, I find it hard to concentrate. Since I've never encountered such a remarkable question, especially from one who talks of nothing but social issues, let's accept your definition of 'social issues' and go from there.

[Bill Tozer]

Great post Dr. Rebane. Some got their undies way up their plumber's crack because of drones hitting civilians. Heaven forbid! But the point is the readers, all readers of this blog, do not condone drones making mince meat out of civilians. Why? Because we hold life as sacred and precious, even if our adversaries in other countries do not hold to the same beliefs.

BF Skinner may have put his kid in the Skinner Box, put we would all be jailed if we tried that at home.

The value of life is what value one places on it. I remember when one of the girls dragged around an large white new Teddy Bear for months as a little toddler.. That bear became tattered, filthy, stained, dirty, ripped, torn and falling apart as she dragged it inside and out. That teddy bear made be considered worthless or worth its weight in trash, but that Teddy Bear was invaluable to her. Why? Because the value she gave it. So is the value of a human life. Who places what value on what human?

I am always amazed that Israel will exchange a hundred of even two hundred Palestine suicide bombers and terrorists and murdering law breakers just to get ONE solitary Israeli soldier or one kidnapped civilian back. 100 of ours for one of theirs is the value the Palestinians place on life. Conversely, 1 of ours for 100 of theirs is the value the Israelis place on a single Israeli life.

Safe to say my Momma placed more value on my life than any of our liberal pro-death friends do, as well it should be.

[Ben Emery]

George,
I get the feeling when we speak of social issues we are speaking very different things.
A general definition

Social issue/ program is when a service is provided so all citizens have a basic level of standard of living, generally to the poor.

[Ben Emery]

Not dying from Malaria I would call a basic level of living.

Also we know community food comes from many different sources. The problem with insecticides is much like bombs it doesn't discriminate. Here is a personal example. In 2012 we had a major cucumber beetle problem, we were told to use Diatomaceous Earth (DE). DE attacks the exoskeleton/ chitin and makes it so those insects dehydrate and die in the most basic explanation. Bees need lots of hydration and fall into the category of what DE will kill or get rid of. So for the short run my plants survive and I will get them pollinated for a season but if everybody in the region used DE to get rid of the beetle problem the bees unless imported will not be around the next year to participate in our symbiotic relationship because we killed them off or killed enough of them they moved to a different region.

[George Rebane]

BenE 736am - I make no exception in accepting the general definition of a social issue. (According to the modern mangling of English semantics, an 'issue' used to known as and called a 'problem') A social issue is a problem that impacts a sizable proportion of some defined population - be it of a country, state, county, city, affinity group, ... - so that it requires some resources to fix or alleviate it. These resources may be private or held collectively, and they may be applied individually in an ad hoc manner or through an established program of a collective. And finally, the problem's solution may sought voluntarily or through a state mandate.

Your definition is very narrow and specifically prescriptive, but it does illustrate the scope of your thinking and sheds light on your arguments. For example, preventing the spread of the H1N5 virus through a pandemic is a social issue, and so is adopting a uniform K-12 curriculum throughout the land.

[fish]

Social issue/ program is when a service is provided so all citizens have a basic level of standard of living, generally to the poor.

Yes...Johnsons "Great Society" has worked wonders for the poor. It's made so many more of them!

Dare I post a link....oh noes!!

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-30/other-america-taxpayers-are-fools-working-stupid

[Ben Emery]

George,
I thought we were using my definition? I don't like to think of human beings who lack financial security as problems. Your examples fit into my definition. K-12 curriculum is a basic level of education we want all citizens to complete.

Fish,
Great Society policies cut poverty in half until the programs were drastically altered or reduced.

[fish]

Great Society policies cut poverty in half until the programs were drastically altered or reduced.

Entitlement spending by governments in the United States has grown from 0.4 percent GDP in 1900 to 19 percent of GDP in 2010.

To the bone Ben....cut right to the bone!

[Ben Emery]

Fish,
Since the 70's our trade policies and tax policies have diminished the ability for average workers to earn a living while the core expenditures (mortgage, health care, education for the average American has spiked. Productivity is at all time high while income levels remain at late 1970's levels. So how did America for the last 3 decades keep up with rising costs while wages remained stagnant, credit. Federal Reserve since Greenspan have made private and public credit extremely easy to get but that 8 lane freeway of money has been reduced down to a two lane road because private and public debts are at all time highs.

No more credit so social programs have increased as more Americans can no longer afford to live at the basic standard of living we have set for ourselves. I personally think that standard of living is wasteful and unsustainable but our entire corrupt government runs on the idea of GDP and perpetual growth. So we continue to pushed towards throw away or materialistic society to keep private sector growth up. It is a liberal way of dealing with a dysfunctional corrupt system. Keep big business profits up by subsidizing them with low income health care, food stamps, and section 8 policies. The conservative way would make the system much less dysfunctional but much more brutal and fascistic. Instead the US currently has a hybrid system that creates the worst parts of both corporatism and socialism.

Reagan was the first full administrations under our new supply side policies and those administrations tripled our nation debt and every administration has followed since. Nixon/ Reagan are when the D's and R's became the same war mongering parties. Clinton exited on the dot com bubble so his administration numbers look better but they actually solidified the policies that plague us today. It is when the D's and R's became economically/ financially the same party.

[fish]

The legendary.... Ben Emery...Immolator of entire platoons of Strawmen!

So was this a response to failed Great Society programs or have we moved on to your beef (perhaps the only area in which we agree) with central banking and credit vs. income substitution? You find so much distasteful about this country that your responses tend to be all over the map.

[Ben Emery]

Fish,
My disgust and disappointment in how our government is being run for my entire life is immeasurable. The people and country aren't the problem it is who our government represents is the problem. The D's and R's represent big business interests, which is less than 10% of the nation population interests. Then the duopoly implements programs to substitute for the very interests that got bribed away with the deal with the special interests. It is not all over the map. It effects literally every major issue we have today so it encompasses a large chunk of our government and society we have today.

The nations that are dealing with the new globalization model best are the Nordic nations. How sustainable they are who knows only time will tell.

[George Rebane]

BenE 920am - It matters little whether we like to think of social issues more accurately as problems or not. They most certainly are a problem for those who have monies taken from them by force to solve/alleviate another's problem (or issue).

[Ben Emery]

George,
Do you believe that you live in a community or as an individual? That is the key question between the Great Divide. When a system is set up to benefit a small few over the masses than who is actually taken monies from who?

[Todd Juvinall]

We are individuals who live in a community. We all live by self interest and many of us help others in need when that arises. You want to use the force of arms to relieve us of our property and then give it to others.

The compact we all have for our community/state/USA is the Constitution. That is the cement that keeps us all sane.

[fish]

My disgust and disappointment in how our government is being run for my entire life is immeasurable. The people and country aren't the problem it is who our government represents is the problem. The D's and R's represent big business interests, which is less than 10% of the nation population interests. Then the duopoly implements programs to substitute for the very interests that got bribed away with the deal with the special interests. It is not all over the map. It effects literally every major issue we have today so it encompasses a large chunk of our government and society we have today.

Answered just like a man running for office.

During my time here I've come to the conclusion that members of the Emery line are genetically incapable of answering direct questions.

The following are a few, to my best recollection, of direct questions posed to members of the Emery family who participate in discussions here:

Paul: "What do you think is an adequate level of taxation"?

Response: Crickets

Ben: "What do you propose, if elected to congress, to alleviate some of the problems you see with this country"?

Response: Crickets (I should qualify this by saying that you did admit that shoehorning the whole of the citizenry onto Medicare was just ducky...although I can't honestly recall if we were even discussing medical care...I think you were making just another stump speech.)

Ben: "What makes you think that you would be any more successful than any of the other 'reformers' if elected to congress"?

Response: Crickets

and so on....

You make speeches and you emote.....this country already has this....in spades!

[Ben Emery]

Fish,
Since I pop in and out of RR I don't go searching for your questions.

Question 1- it means the people are willing to change the status quo and as single representative very little will change. The fact that the people chose to go outside of the two parties shows a paradigm shift.

Question 2- I hate and I mean hate anybody who think they can buy me off whether it be at a job that treats people like crap, exploits the environment, or making legislation that would benefit a small few over the many.

Does that answer your questions.

I have dozens of solutions but they go against the status quo and would take a massive movement and the removal of the current leadership in both D's and R's.

I believe the Tea Party and real progressives anger is justifiable and healthy for our nation. Only those with passion will ever create change. The old wealthy/ powerful will always want to suppress and oppress this change so it is always a huge fight.

[Ben Emery]

as for adequate tax levels here is a starter. I just got done with my homework and need to get to work so you are on your own for deciphering the proposal.

From Robert Reich "The Obama Budget"
http://robertreich.org/post/3277360050

The most direct way to get more money into their pockets is to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit (a wage subsidy) all the way up through people earning $50,000, and reduce their income taxes to zero. Taxes on incomes between $50,000 and $90,000 should be cut to 10 percent; between $90,000 and $150,000 to 20 percent; between $150,000 and $250,000 to 30 percent.

And exempt the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes.

Make up the revenues by increasing taxes on incomes between $250,000 to $500,000 to 40 percent; between $500,000 and $5 million, to 50 percent; between $5 million and $15 million, to 60 percent; and anything over $15 million, to 70 percent.

And raise the ceiling on the portion of income subject to payroll taxes to $500,000.

It’s called progressive taxation.

[program pit 2013]

Everything said was very logical. But, think about this, suppose you composed a catchier post title? I ain't suggesting your content is not good, however what if you added a title that makes people desire more? I mean Trolleyology and the Value of Human Lives - Rebane's Ruminations is kinda boring. You should peek at Yahoo's front page and watch how they create post headlines to get people to open the links. You might add a video or a picture or two to get people excited about everything've got to say. In my opinion, it could make your blog a little livelier.|

[George Rebane]

BenE 1206pm - re living in communities, I'll go with ToddJ's 1142am. And that "question" has NOTHING to do with the notion of the Great Divide.

In the event that this is news to you (and yours) the vast amount and fraction of the taken monies are taken from the top three quintiles, because, a la Willie Sutton, that is where the money is. To boot, socialism screws the middle class, always has, always will. And take a look at the proportion of taxes paid by top quintile relative to the proportion of income they receive.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/07/tax-rates-fair-enough-already.html

Thank you for sharing your progressive tax rate schedule with us. That was an appreciated and understood direct answer.

[fish]

Well it's a start!

The Obama Budget: And Why the Coming Debate Over Spending Cuts Has Nothing to Do With Reviving the Economy

SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2011

President Obama has chosen to fight fire with gasoline.

Government is too big! That Reich can't recognize it isn't my problem. Other equally well known economists who aren't as wedded to the political as Reich know and admit to it. Do you mean to tell me that Reich can't identify anything that FedGov does poorly or shouldn't do at all? Even you and Paul think that cutting the military is an area where we could find potential savings...Reich can't even entertain that. You would think that such an esteemed economist might take a run at the Federal Mohair Subsidy....anything...just to throw me a bone....I guess not.

Today (Monday) Obama pours gas on the Republican flame by proposing a 2012 federal budget that cuts the federal deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years. About $400 billion of this will come from a five-year freeze on non-security discretionary spending – including all sorts of programs for poor and working-class Americans, such as heating assistance to low-income people and community-service block grants. Most of the rest from additional spending cuts, such as grants to states for water treatment plants and other environmental projects and higher interest charges on federal loans to graduate students.

"All sorts of programs for poor and working-class Americans".....A list would be good Bob....things that Mr. Ivory Tower thinks are vital probably aren't. I keep coming back to to Obamaphones...shit Ben do the downtrodden need eight? You guys won't even police the programs in existence until they wind up embarrassing you when the fraud is revealed.

If TEAM Progressive would spend fewer tax dollars buying off poltical donors with the various Solyndras and Fiskers there might be more money for programs for the poor.

That means the Great Debate starting this week will be set by Republicans: Does Obama cut enough spending? How much more will he have cut in order to appease Republicans? If they don’t get the spending cuts they want, will Tea-Party Republicans demand a shut-down?

Tough shit little man! It's politics....your team is putting in a pretty poor showing against mediocre opponents. John Boehner...please!

Framed this way, the debate invites deficit hawks on both sides of the aisle to criticize Democrats and Republicans alike for failing to take on Social Security and Medicare entitlements. Expect Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, co-chairs of Obama’s deficit commission, to say the President needs to do more. Expect Alice Rivlin and Paul Ryan, respectively former Clinton hawk and current Republican budget hawk, to tout their plan for chopping Medicare.

It’s the wrong debate about the wrong thing at the wrong time.

Why is it the wrong debate...the whole point of Obamacare was to cost shift from the young to the old, from the non-voters to the reliable voters.....fucking over medicare recipients had to be part of the plan too! Why don't the baby boomers have any skin in the game?

Social Security might have a slim chance of survival....Medicare is toast....unless Reich has a spare 150 trillion lying around somewhere.

To official Washington it seems like 1995 all over again, when Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich played a game of chicken over cutting the budget deficit, the hawks warned about the perils of giant deficits, and the 1996 general election loomed over all. Washington politicians and the media know this playbook by heart, so it’s natural for them to take on the same roles, make the same arguments, and build up to the same showdown over a government shutdown and a climactic presidential election.

Cited without evidence. More politics Bob....I thought this was economics?

But the 1995 playbook is irrelevant. In 1995 the economy was roaring back to life. The recession of 1991 had been caused (as are most recessions) by the Fed raising interest rates too high to ward off inflation. So reversing course was relatively simple. Alan Greenspan and the Fed cut interest rates.

Which caused billions of Bubble Bucks to flow into the dot.com boom which......shocker.....ended in tears too.

In 2011 most Americans are still in the throes of the Great Recession, which was caused by the bursting of a giant debt bubble. The Fed can’t reverse course by cutting interest rates; rates have been near zero for two years.

That's right you can't force people to take on additional debt when they are trying to do the right thing by repairing their personal balance sheets. There is no incentive to take on additional debt when financial positions are so tenuous....and what will FedGov do to improve any of this...... continue to tighten the regulatory screws and impose additional costs (Obamacare anyone...??). Why roll the dice and try and start new a business in this environment?

Big American companies are sitting on almost $2 trillion of cash because there aren’t enough customers to buy additional goods and services. The only people with money are the richest 10 percent whose stock portfolios have been roaring back to life, but their spending isn’t enough to spur much additional hiring.

Yeah...and Little Bobby will never catch them. They have the means to fight back...they employ sophisticated tax strategies, they have attorneys, they move money where President Hollow Chocolate Bunny and his minions can't wrap their gasping bony little fingers around it. Even when you pin them down they can keep entire IRS sections busy for years...waiting for more favorable political winds. You admit as much in many of your posts...."the corporations...they're just too powerful"!

The Republican bromide – cut federal spending – is precisely the wrong response to this ongoing crisis, which is more analogous to the Great Depression than to any recent recession. Herbert Hoover responded the same way between 1929 and 1932. Insufficient spending only deepened the Great Depression.

"Insufficient spending only deepened the Great Depression"...again presented without evidence. Historically the downturns where the government just got out of the way and let the market clear all the mistakes we're sharper but far briefer episodes. Reichs default impulse towards messianic government doesn't permit him to do nothing.....and they'll fuck it up....and fuck it up but good, just like they're doing now....but it's okay because all that matters is their good intentions.

The best way to revive the economy is not to cut the federal deficit right now. It’s to put more money into the pockets of average working families. Not until they start spending again big time will companies begin to hire again big time.

Then why not cut.....really cut taxes.....like to zero?? Not the half measure that he proposes! It doesn't need to be forever and will let people know that they had better do it soon because it won't last forever. Let them raid their 401(k) accounts to put their personal balance sheets back in order. FedGov desperately needs to spur inflation so they can shaft their bondholders and reduce debt carrying costs.....if you want to gin up inflation this will work.

Of course they'll never do it..you can't have the rabble ever thinking that radically reduced taxation is a good thing!

Reich wants to flog the EITC.....good luck with that!

Don’t cut the government services they rely on – college loans, home heating oil, community services, and the rest. State and local budget cuts are already causing enough pain.

FedGov has no business in the college loan business....you want to lower college costs....let a few schools go belly up and you'll see price competition in a hurry. Reich can't even see that the whole college delivery method is changing and that what he really wants is to preserve a failing business model.

"Community services, and the rest"...again this is a convenient method for not addressing areas where cuts could likely be made....just say "community Services and imply that it's vital and hope the reader looks the other way! Reich refuses to think that America can do without a single program. He simply isn't serious about addressing the problem!

The most direct way to get more money into their pockets is to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit (a wage subsidy) all the way up through people earning $50,000, and reduce their income taxes to zero. Taxes on incomes between $50,000 and $90,000 should be cut to 10 percent; between $90,000 and $150,000 to 20 percent; between $150,000 and $250,000 to 30 percent.

And exempt the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes.

This is the only area in which Reich flirts with reality......this would get money moving....but without reducing spending the increased debt loading is going to kill the US on the back side. It would show the already screwed bondholders that the US has absolutely no intention of ever putting its financial house in order. I wonder how much credibility we'll have when the only bond buyer is the Federal Reseve>

Make up the revenues by increasing taxes on incomes between $250,000 to $500,000 to 40 percent; between $500,000 and $5 million, to 50 percent; between $5 million and $15 million, to 60 percent; and anything over $15 million, to 70 percent.

And raise the ceiling on the portion of income subject to payroll taxes to $500,000.

It’s called progressive taxation.

Reich will take money from the first group directly out of the economy! This group really isn't rich so you will simply substitute government spending for their spending...no net gain.

On the lower end of this group Reich will take money from them and simply transfer the spending to the government. This group at the higher end of the range will make changes to minimize the impact...they aren't going to passively sit there while Reich steals them blind. You'll get some but not nearly enough. Almost no net gain.

The next two groups will simply use the tax strategies that small business and members of congress use to stay out of the clutches of policies of their own making. Reich won't be able to get them.

The lion’s share of America’s income and wealth is at the top. Taxing the very rich won’t hurt the economy. They spend a much smaller portion of their incomes than everyone else.

Sure – take some steps to cut federal spending over the longer term. Cut the bloated defense budget. Tame the growth in healthcare costs by allowing the federal government to use its bargaining clout — as the nation’s biggest purchaser of drugs and hospital services under Medicare and Medicaid and the Veterans Administration – to get low prices. While we’re at it, cut agricultural subsidies.

Wow...at the very end a sop to spending discipline. Ben in Little Robbie Reichs world the longer term never comes....if they get the economy moving evryone will start to feel better about things and the pressure to address these issues will go away....it always works like this! Every politician takes a victory lap and sound policy is forgotten!

But don’t believe for a moment that federal spending cuts anytime soon will get the economy growing soon. They’ll have the opposite effect because they’ll reduce total demand.

The progressive tax system I’ve outlined will get the economy growing again. This, in turn, will bring down the ratio of the debt as a proportion of the total economy — the only yardstick of fiscal prudence that counts.

But we can’t get to this point – or even to have a debate about it – if Obama allows Republicans to frame the debate as how much federal spending can be cut and how to shrink the deficit.

The President has to reframe the debate around the necessity of average families having enough to spend to get the economy moving again. He needs to remind America this is not 1995 but 2011 — and we’re still in a jobs crisis brought on by the bursting of a giant debt bubble and the implosion of total demand.

And we close with more Keynesian bilge at the end!

Well it's an answer Ben...somebody elses but an answer nonetheless...I think we've really made a breakthrough with that instinct towards question avoidance Ben!

[fish]

This dropped in while I was fisking Little Bobby Reichs latest offering!

Fish,

Since I pop in and out of RR I don't go searching for your questions.

Question 1- it means the people are willing to change the status quo and as single representative very little will change. The fact that the people chose to go outside of the two parties shows a paradigm shift.

Question 2- I hate and I mean hate anybody who think they can buy me off whether it be at a job that treats people like crap, exploits the environment, or making legislation that would benefit a small few over the many.

Does that answer your questions.

I have dozens of solutions but they go against the status quo and would take a massive movement and the removal of the current leadership in both D's and R's.

I believe the Tea Party and real progressives anger is justifiable and healthy for our nation. Only those with passion will ever create change. The old wealthy/ powerful will always want to suppress and oppress this change so it is always a huge fight.

Not really! I suppose it's all I'm likely to get so it'll have to do!

In the short term then....I mean until what is existence politically now collapses utterly...you are running on the "Skittle Shitting Unicorn Platform"! Let me know how that works out for you....and for all of us!

Paradigm shift....? You need to return Frisches political catch phrase thesaurus......paradigm shift....(snicker).

(George...the italics feature is hung up again)

[George Rebane]

fish 231pm - you really have to check your HTML delimiters when you use intermittent italics Mr fish. In this case you delimited the "... cut agricultural subsidies" in your 220pm novelette with a <,/,> , i.e. no lower case 'i' included (I fixed it). I've been cleaning up after you (and others) on this problem for years. To be frank, I'm kinda tired of it.

[fish]

My apologies George. I try to keep them properly paired but I use a ton and frequently overlook one or two.

[George Rebane]

program pit 2013 1248pm - thanks for the recommendations. But as it is, RR is about as or more lively (unique viewers, page loads, and comments) than I can handle. I do have another life or two besides this blog, although I am very grateful for my readership - its ideological diversity, general intellectual level, and size. I neither claim nor want to write for the masses, the bar here is set just about right. Looking forward to your topical comments.

[Gerry Fedor]

Fish, I have to wonder if you don't care about Todd wasting @$300K in federal bailout TARP money then you should be good with a number of other issues such as letting illegals being here, and about wasting money on a number of other issues problematic issues.

The point here is to not try to tell us about the problems of the US, when people like Todd are the problem!

They say one thing but when the rubber hits the road they'll do whatever it takes to protect themselves even if it's not what the spout about the causes of the problems in this country.

Todd needs to "man up" and pay back his losses before we even think about listening to what a hypocrite says! That means he should take money from his retirement, sell his house, or do whatever it takes, or he needs to STFU about the problems in this country that are caused by people like him!

[Todd Juvinall]

Methinks Gerry Fedor is really MichaelA. George, can you check this numbnuts email?

For some reason hs fairy tales about me seem familiar.

[fish]

Again Gerry....and I'll type slowly so you get this....a contract for property is fairly simple. A person applies to borrow money, the bank lends them this money if they are deemed to be a worthy credit risk. If they fail to satisfy the language of the contract the bank takes possession of the property. The borrower typically takes a pretty significant hit to their credit.

The fact that FedGov opted to save their favored banks by enacting TARP is hardly Mr. Juvinalls concern!

You keep swinging for the fences though swinger...I'm sure you'll run into one one of these days.

[George Rebane]

GerryF 620pm - I echo Mr fish's 708pm. To my knowledge ToddJ lived up to the terms of his loan agreement. If everyone who has recently had a foreclosure or had to surrender his loan collateral has his First Amendment rights restricted as you prescribe, then a good portion of the country would have to fall silent. We do wonder what is your point in this pursuit?

[Todd Juvinall]

He is a sock puppet as far as I can see. He is not findable and I have no idea who he is. Sounds like he is having a personal problem..Maybe I dated his GF in high school. LOL!

[Bill Tozer]

Heck Mr. Fedor, lets go all the way and bring back Debtors' Prison. And don't get your mangina all upset cause Mr. Juvinall boned your sweetheart. She isn't all that bad once you get pass the used parts.

[Todd Juvinall]

Thanks Bill. This fellow Fedor hates the Sheriff we all respect becasue of the POT Ordinace. He was everywhere in the blogs and the Union trashing Keith and Law Enforcement here. My guess is his defense of POT growing here may be personal. I have been attacked by much more intelligent people than this Fedor character so it really doesn't bother me. After 30 years in politics you develop a thick skin. Besides, what has Fedor done for Nevada County or anyone else that he can speak of? Probably nothing as liberals are all yak with no sack. LOL!

[Bill Tozer]

"liberals are all yak with no sack. LOL!" Good one. Unhappy people say unhappy things. Sick people do sick things. He/she must be externalizing his/her internalities.

Onward to more palatable topics like malaria.

[MikeL]

Gerry, yeah Todd is a real dick for shorting the tax payers on his project kinda like the solar power boondoogle called California Valley Solar Ranch except 10000 times worse. I know.. you hate Todd for some reason.. I read above that he allegedly slept with your girl friend back in the 70's...ok i can understand holding a grudge, but you need to focus your outrage on the real rip offs..like the solar power scams.
I don't know maybe you are in on the scam and making money off the backs of the poor folks who live in areas of California that require air conditioning....oh that's right I remember now..you did say you are making cash off of your 3000 watt solar panel system.

[Bill Tozer]

Mr. L: Here is an old laundry list (11/2012) our lovely green companies that received federal funding and have paid us back. *Denotes filed for bankruptcy protection. There was another one last week which filed for bankruptcy leaving us on the hook for 41 million. That could buy a lot of houses in Nevada County and create more jobs here. I can't recall the name of the firm cause it is so hard to keep up with just the updates, lol.

Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
Solyndra ($535 million)*
Beacon Power ($43 million)*
Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
SunPower ($1.2 billion)
First Solar ($1.46 billion)
Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
Amonix ($5.9 million)
Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
Abound Solar ($400 million)*
A123 Systems ($279 million)*
Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
Johnson Controls ($299 million)
Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
ECOtality ($126.2 million)
Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
Range Fuels ($80 million)*
Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
GreenVolts ($500,000)
Vestas ($50 million)
LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
Navistar ($39 million)
Satcon ($3 million)*
Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
Mascoma Corp. ($1

80% of the monies BarackObama of BarackObamacare notoriety gave to create wonderful economy saving green jobs ended up in the hands of BarackObama donors. If you want to play, you are going to pay.

[Bill Tozer]

Opps. MAJOR LACK OF PROOF READING: They have NOT paid us back!! Throw them and their spouses in Debtor's Prison and take away their right to vote. Chop off their hands and cut out their tongues and cast their intestines to the buzzards. They deserve no respect and we should not listen to anyone from those companies until they pay back every blue cent.

[Ben Emery]

Fish,
Can we vote for something different if the option isn't there?

Hearing a candidate taking on both parties is very refreshing for many people.
Other 40% Democratic 32% Republican 28% are the voter registration numbers in the US. If voters would vote their conscience instead of their fears we would have a much different representation in our government.

Progressive Taxation and Demand Side Economics worked before and we had the largest strongest middle class in world history. We switched to Supply Side Economics and dropped taxation to where capital is taxed lower than labor and the middle class has been disappearing.

[fish]

Fish,

Can we vote for something different if the option isn't there?

Hearing a candidate taking on both parties is very refreshing for many people.
Other 40% Democratic 32% Republican 28% are the voter registration numbers in the US. If voters would vote their conscience instead of their fears we would have a much different representation in our government.

Progressive Taxation and Demand Side Economics worked before and we had the largest strongest middle class in world history. We switched to Supply Side Economics and dropped taxation to where capital is taxed lower than labor and the middle class has been disappearing.

"We" can vote for whatever you can talk people into voting for. If you can convince Nevada county/Grass Valley voters that you're "the guy"...well who am I to criticize them for their choice. That what you offer is "refreshing" and different...well I'm not convinced especially after you answered my earlier question by turning in Robert Reichs homework.

Additionally, Ben I wouldn't conflate the prosperity that occurred post WWII with progressive taxation....it really didn't hurt to have the only un-smashed industrial base left in the world. The US economy was strong in spite of high taxation not because of it! Let's also not forget that a vast expansion of the mangerial/regulatory state accompanied your disappearing middle class. It seems that business will adapt to high wage costs or excessive regulation. When they have to do both they decamp for more favorable climes.