working

ADVERTISERS

POPULAR TAGS

 Outside the Beltway 

Overdosing on Michael Jackson

Ladies and gentlemen, Mike Lester:

via Frank Stephenson via Robert Prather

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

OTB Latenight - Talking Heads

Live in Rome, 1980, with Adrian Belew on guitar:

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comment here »
 

14 Reasons List Posts Are Bad

Responding to a Twitter exchange this morning, Jay Canono lists “Fourteen reasons I hate list posts.”  Several of his reasons are valid.

The genre is popular for understandable reasons and they can in fact (contrary to objection #6) sometimes produce very interesting debates in the comments sections.  But the posts themselves are seldom very illuminating.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
 

Al Franken Won: Minnesota Supreme Court - Coleman Concedes

In a 5-0 decision, the state’s highest court ordered that Al Franken be declared the winner.

The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled today that Democrat Al Franken won the U.S. Senate election and said he was entitled to an election certificate that would lead to him being seated in the Senate.

“Affirmed,” wrote the Supreme Court, unanimously rejecting Republican Norm Coleman’s claims that inconsistent practices by local elections officials and wrong decisions by a lower court had denied him victory.

“Al Franken received the highest number of votes legally cast and is entitled [under Minnesota law] to receive the certificate of election as United States Senator from the State of Minnesota,” the court wrote.

No surprise, really.  One would think Norm Coleman about out of options but this thing has managed to go on seemingly forever.

I’ve maintained from the beginning of this fiasco that 1) the election was for all intents and purposes a tie and 2) Coleman, who was ahead when the initial counting stopped — and after the initial recount! — and saw some really weird things go against him, had every right to fight this in court but that 3) it has long been apparent that Franken was going to win and all Coleman’s tactics were achieving was denying Minnesotans their just representation in the Senate and therefore 4) he should have quit this farce some time back.  It’s time to accept the inevitable and move on.

UPDATE:  Coleman has conceded.

“The Supreme Court has made its decision and I will abide by the results,” Coleman told reporters outside his St. Paul home. “In these tough times we all need to focus on the future, and the future is that we have a new United States senator,” Coleman said.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

Asked and Answered - Workaday Life Editon

Conor Friedersdorf asks, “am I really expected to work 40+ hours per week, 50 weeks per year, for decades? Am I to savor only two days off each week? Am I to vacation but two weeks per annum?”

Yes.

(Well, actually, you should get some holidays off.  And, maybe, get a third week of vacation at some point.  But, basically, yeah.)

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

Firefox 3.5 Available

Mozilla has just released version 3.5 of its Firefox browser. CNET’s Stephen Shankland:

Firefox 3.5 has a range of new features, including a new JavaScript engine for faster Web applications such as Google Docs; the ability to show video built into Web pages without plug-ins; a private browsing mode; fancy downloadable fonts; and geolocation technology that can let Web sites know where you are.

“So much is happening on the Web right now, it’s a great time for browsers,” said John Lilly, CEO of Firefox backer Mozilla, in a statement. And, he boasted, “Firefox 3.5 brings together the most innovative Web technologies and delivers them in the most complete and powerful modern browser.”

PC World’s Michael Muchmore adds,

The new version brings a private browsing mode, faster JavaScript performance, and support for emerging HTML 5 standards such as plug-in-free video and audio playing. [...] The browser also includes new technology that will allow users to tell sites their location, which will let sites deliver relevant information, for example, about nearby eateries and businesses. The features uses Google Location Services, which obtains your whereabouts using a database of WiFi access points and other known IP addresses.

Though JavaScript performance is more than twice as fast with the browser’s new TraceMonkey engine, it still trails Chrome on benchmark tests performed by PCMag.com. The new video and audio support make use of the Ogg Vorbis and Ogg Theora open source codecs, but these are yet to be adopted by the Web’s governing body, the W3C, as official standards.

A geekier review by UZee at TechnoPath :

This latest update includes many improvements to the rendering engine, including support for native <video> and <audio> tags in accordance with HTML 5 specification, as well as improved support for CSS 2.1 and CSS 3. The TraceMonkey JavaScript engine also saw some fine tuning to make it even more faster allowing a much smoother browsing experience. This however had no effect on the Acid3 score which was still 93, same as the previous version. It is interesting to note that Minefield also got an Acid3 score of 93, meaning that there was no significant change in the JavaScript engine for that release.

I of course downloaded and installed it immediately.  Well, actually, I downloaded it from Mozilla’s site, it took forever, and I wound up with a corrupt file.  I then downloaded it from CNET (linked above) in seconds and installed without difficulty.

A couple of the extensions that I forgot that I had installed are incompatible with the new edition, so it’s probably worth waiting if you use a lot of add-ons.
Via Twitter, Hal Hildebrand reports that the “clear private data” feature has been removed.  As I understand it, it’s been replaced by new features that allow you to browse privately and clear specific sites from your browsing list.  This, no doubt, is designed to hide from your wife or parents that you’re looking at, um, things you might buy them for their birthday.

One thing I noticed immediately is a + button next to the rightmost open tab which instantly opens a new, blank page.  That’s handy.  My workaround had been to open a random new tab from the toolbar.

UPDATE: It’s both shrewd and creepy that a certain company that does no evil is filling the ad slots on this page with promotions for its own, competing browser.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

Health Care, Pooling, and Monopsony

At a recent press conference President Obama had this to say about the public health care option he is floating as part of his proposal for reforming health care and its impact on private health care options,

Now, the public plan I think is a important tool to discipline insurance companies. What we’ve said is, under our proposal, let’s have a system the same way that federal employees do, same way that members of Congress do, where — we call it an “exchange,” or you can call it a “marketplace” — where essentially you’ve got a whole bunch of different plans. If you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won’t have to do a thing. You keep your plan. You keep your doctor. If your employer is providing you good health insurance, terrific, we’re not going to mess with it.

But if you’re a small business person, if the insurance that’s being offered is something you can’t afford, if you want to shop for a better price, then you can go to this exchange, this marketplace, and you can look: Okay, this is how much this plan costs, this is how much that plan costs, this is what the coverage is like, this is what fits for my family. As one of those options, for us to be able to say, here’s a public option that’s not profit-driven, that can keep down administrative costs and that provides you good, quality care for a reasonable price — as one of the options for you to choose, I think that makes sense.

Does this make sense? I don’t think it necessarily does. After all we don’t need a government grocery store, a government video store, or government car dealers (hmmm, scratch that last one), to keep prices reasonable and affordable (and even with cars we still don’t need the government to keep prices reasonable). So why would this government plan be able to offer the same types of coverage at a lower cost? What is the basis for this belief?

President Obama mentions lower administrative costs? Is he thinking that the plans in this “health exchange” will be like Medicare? But the question then becomes, why are Medicare’s administrative costs so low? Is it, at least in part, that Medicare doesn’t have to screen out for pre-existing conditions? If that is the case, then the overall costs might actually higher (lower administrative costs, but higher costs in terms of treating people with pre-existing conditions), this would preclude the viability of the public option since as President Obama already notes, the private options are too expensive. An even more expensive public option is not going to be anymore attractive.

If the above is true, the only way for the public option to become viable is for it to use taxpayer money—i.e. subsidies. But here we have another problem as seen by the following exchange,

Q Won’t that drive private insurers out of business?

THE PRESIDENT: Why would it drive private insurers out of business? If private insurers say that the marketplace provides the best quality health care, if they tell us that they’re offering a good deal, then why is it that the government — which they say can’t run anything — suddenly is going to drive them out of business? That’s not logical.

It is quite logical if the public option is subsidized by taxpayer money. In that case, private insurance providers who are seeking to maximize profits will not be able to compete if the public option plan is priced too low due to the subsidies.

The only other possible way for the public option to be cheaper and not rely on taxpayer money is if there health care insurance providers have market power and are engaging in some type of price discrimination when it comes to charging firms for employee benefits. However, even here there are possible alternative policies to creating a government run health care plan that would have tremendous pressure to use taxpayer money to fund. For example, if there is market power and price discrimination the solution is to promote more competition not reduce it. To do this would require identifying and removing barriers to entry into geographic regions for the health care insurance market. And it is quite likely that the barriers are a result of state, local and the federal governments. Various regulatory requirements may restrict entry and thereby grant incumbents in the market power to raise prices and restrict output.

And we have to keep in mind that there are going to be tremendous pressure on whatever entity is in charge of this new program and politicians as well. Rent seeking is how most people in DC make their living—finding ways to acquire income that they have not earned.

Now, by the way, I should point out that part of the reform that we’ve suggested is that if you want to be a private insurer as part of the exchange, as part of this marketplace, this menu of options that people can choose from, we’re going to have some different rules for all insurance companies — one of them being that you can’t preclude people from getting health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, you can’t cherry pick and just take the healthiest people.

Here is one possibility: the public option has only those with pre-existing conditions or is dominated by such people. After all, suppose we have two plans a public plan and a private plan. If you are healthy then the private plan may look okay. If you have a pre-existing condition you can’t sign up for the private plan unless it wants to go into the public option pool. So private plans might still exist, but “skim the cream” off the public pool options. This might “significantly lower administrative costs” but it will likely result in significantly higher premiums. In this case, the public option pool will provide no discipline for the private market as they really are no longer in competition. Further, the public pool option could end up being very expensive and the pressure to subsidize it will increase even more. I’d argue it would be almost certain that the government would subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. Now, a subsidized public pool very well could look more attractive to people on the private plan. Thus, it is basically a way to backdoor for a single payer system run by the government. And once there are no more private plans, then the government can start reducing the supply of health care.

Because once the government is the dominant player, possibly even the only player, it is now a monopsony. And a monopsony can dictate price in the market place. Now that might sound good at first glance, but let us go back to fundamental economics. If you set the price below the market clearing price what happens? Supply is less than demand. You have less of whatever good in question has a monopsony. The reason for this is simple and pretty much inescapable. With the price below the market clearing price firms that would otherwise be earning profits and producing no longer earn a profit and shut down, and firms that are shut down produce nothing. This should not be a shocking result. A market where there are many buyers and sellers is part of the definition of a competitive market. Competitive markets tend to have lower prices and more output than markets with less competition.

In the end, I can see all of this reducing the amount of health care people have access too, and maybe that is what needs to happen. However, I think it is dishonest to pretend that people can have more health care and pay less for it and reduce growth rates of costs all at the same time. That is not logical.

Photo by Flickr user Brooks Elliot, used under the Creative Commons License.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

More on the Honduran Crisis

I was able to find the exact text of the plebiscite that Manuel “Mel” Zelaya wanted to proffer to the citizens of Honduras this past Sunday. The text and a photo of the ballot that was to be used can be found here.

The odd thing, and a fact that hasn’t made it into a lot of press accounts or snap judgments about the situation, is that the language in question is not about re-election, but rather would have asked whether or not the public wanted to have a referendum in November about whether or not to call a constitutional convention to write a new constitution. As such, it is unclear to me at the moment why the accusation was that Zelaya was seeking immediate re-election, as even if his plebiscite had been approved, I cannot see how it would have led to be him being on the ballot in November (which is when the next presidential term, which starts in January, is set to be filled). I will continue to research that issue.

More discussion at the link above.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

Madoff vs. Murderers

Dr. Helen Smith (aka Mrs. Glenn Reynolds and The InstaWife) asks, in re Bernie Madoff’s 150 year sentence, “Why is it that someone who set up a Ponzi scheme gets more jail time than the majority of murderers?”

Glenn Reynolds, Esq. (aka, the InstaPundit) answers, “I think it’s because he made powerful people look stupid.”

There’s something to that.  But “the majority of murderers” kill only one person.  Madoff bilked thousands of people out of billions of dollars.  At some point, volume makes up for severity.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

SOFA, So Good

In accordance with the status of forces agreement negotiated between the U. S. government and the Iraqi national government last year under Presidents Bush and Maliki, respectively, U. S. forces are no longer to be seen on the streets of Baghdad:

BAGHDAD — Iraq declared a public holiday Tuesday to celebrate the official withdrawal of American troops from Iraqi cities and towns, emptying the streets as many people stayed home because they feared violence.

As official Iraq celebrated, the American military announced the death of four soldiers on Monday from combat operations in Baghdad, a reminder of the continuing hazards for American troops here and the vulnerability of soldiers as they wrap up operations in the field.

In the past few weeks, with the approach of the official date for withdrawal, nationalist sentiments have spread within the Iraqi government and military, with officials all but boasting publicly that Iraq is ready to handle the security situation on its own. The date of June 30 was set in an Iraqi-American security agreement that went into effect on Jan. 1, 2009.

Claiming that American forces have completely left Iraqi cities is a bit of an exaggeration. U. S. forces will remain in the city of Mosul, at least for the time being:

Although the number of daily attacks have been cut in half, security in Mosul is still precarious. Iraqi officials last week agreed to allow several dozen US soldiers to remain at each of five small bases within the city. After June 30, those combat outposts will be called “joint security stations” and the American soldiers will assist their Iraqi counterparts under the new stricter rules.

“The coalition is going to stay in some of the places where we need them – we will call for help,” said General Ghazal.

Additionally, American trainers will continue to be embedded with Iraqi units and I suspect they’ll be spotted in Iraqi cities from time to time.

Although there may be an increase in violence in Iraq as a consequence of the reduced visibility of American forces, I think that this small move in the direction of complete Iraqi sovereignty is wholly salutary and I’d also hope for a substantial reduction in the forces we have in Iraq by the end of the year. I don’t think I have too many illusions about the situation in Iraq. I think the situation will remain dangerous and fractious for the foreseeable future.

I opposed the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and I opposed our withdrawal from Iraq in 2005 or 2006. I think that events have proven me right on both scores. Now I think it’s time for us to start leaving.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

MPAA Loses Again

The Supreme Court yesterday declined to hear an appeal from the MPAA, thus letting stand a lower court ruling that Cablevision’s new remote DVR technology does not constitute a “retransmission” of the programming and thus require additional fees.

The new DVR service would work by storing a viewer’s recordings in computers housed at the cable operator, rather than in a box attached to the viewer’s TV set, making it easier and cheaper for cable and phone companies to offer a recording service. The court said Monday it wouldn’t disturb a federal appeals court ruling that the technology doesn’t violate copyright laws.

Cablevision has said it would launch the service as soon as this summer. Spokesmen for other pay-TV companies, including Time Warner Cable Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc., said they are looking into using such a technology but declined to comment on when they might do so.

The decision is likely to accelerate adoption of DVRs in the U.S., potentially eating into ad revenue at TV networks. As a group, people watching recorded shows on DVRs fast-forward past more than half the commercials, according to network and advertising executives. That makes DVR viewers less valuable to networks selling ad time than the viewers who watch shows live.

But DVR viewers also watch more TV, some network executives say, making an argument for a potential upside to broader DVR penetration. The technology was already in 30% of the U.S. households with televisions as of May, according to Nielsen Co.

That last part is certainly right.  With the advent of DVR technology, combined with the ability to watch older shows via Netflix and/or Roku, I spend less time watching television and but see more programming.  Indeed, I’m at the point where I find even fast-forwarding through commercials an annoyance.

I’m not at all enthusiastic about having the cable companies, who are in bed with the TV networks, in control of my programming and can’t imagine switching to that sort of service.  Yes, having a massive on-demand inventory of current shows would be a boon.  But my strong guess is that, in short order, they’ll make it difficult or impossible to skip commercials.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

Taking Ockham’s Razor to Sarah Palin Haters

Since his departure from the Washington Times, Stacy McCain has become perhaps the most skilled attention whore in all the blogosphere.

Yeah, I just wrote that. And put it on the Internet.

In seeking to explain why Ken Layne and Andrew Sullivan seem to loathe Sarah Palin and, in particular, make sport of her Down Syndrome suffering infant son, Trig, Stacy puts forth a pop psychology theory in four part harmony involving gay psychology, the fear of spinsterdom, and tips for hunting hillbillies.

Taking Ockham’s Razor (or, in the case of certain residents of West Virginia, Ockham’s Toothbrush) to the problem, however, a simpler explanation arises:  They do it for the same reason Stacy writes posts like this one.

First, regardless of intelligence and education, people have prejudices based on their own experience and tend to judge people who don’t conform to their expectations rather harshly.  Sarah Palin does not dress, talk, or act like a governor — much less a vice presidential candidate — is supposed to.

Second, saying outrageous things that cultured people aren’t supposed to say out loud is an excellent way of attracting and sustaining attention.  Holding forth the view that Sarah Palin chose to carry Trig to term after learning that he had Down Syndrome, just like everyone assumed all along, is not going to get you many clickthroughs.

Illustration: Chris Madden Cartoons

Correction:  An earlier version of the post had Sullivan, Layne, and Ana Marie Cox pushing the Trig Palin birth origin conspiracy story.  In fact, Layne merely reprinted a cartoon involving Trig Palin. I don’t think Cox had anything to do with this at all, aside from being the original Wonkette.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

Caption Contest Winners

The Easy Pieces of Eight Edition OTB Caption ContestTM is now over.

gyrates

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

US Hands Baghdad to Iraqis

Given how much of the early years of OTB was devoted to writing about the war in Iraq, it wouldn’t do to fail to mention the fact that we have formally handed over control of Baghdad to the Iraqis, withdrawing our combat troops.  It was not at all long ago that the headline currently topping YahooNews, “Iraq takes control of security, US troops withdraw,” seemed a distant dream.

US General Daniel Bolger (L), commander of US forces in Baghdad shakes hands with General Abud Qambar, commander of Baghdad Operation Command, after handing him a symbolic key of the1st Cavalry Division at the old Iraqi Defence Ministry, the last of the 86 positions occupied by the US military in Baghdad since the US-led invasion in 2003, on June 29, 2009. US combat troops will pull out from Iraq's cities and main towns June 30 as the war-torn country takes sole charge of security in a major stepping stone to a complete American withdrawal.  AFP PHOTO / ALI AL-SAADI (Photo credit should read ALI AL-SAADI/AFP/Getty Images)

US General Daniel Bolger (L), commander of US forces in Baghdad shakes hands with General Abud Qambar, commander of Baghdad Operation Command, after handing him a symbolic key of the1st Cavalry Division at the old Iraqi Defence Ministry, the last of the 86 positions occupied by the US military in Baghdad since the US-led invasion in 2003, on June 29, 2009. US combat troops will pull out from Iraq's cities and main towns June 30 as the war-torn country takes sole charge of security in a major stepping stone to a complete American withdrawal. AFP PHOTO / ALI AL-SAADI (Photo credit should read ALI AL-SAADI/AFP/Getty Images.)

As to what it all means, Chris Dierkes nails it with a post I’ve republished (with permission) at New Atlantiicst under the title “Iraq Victory Achieved with Handover?” Suffice it to say, this is a “decent outcome” rather than a “victory” and we’ve got many miles to go before we know how it all turned out.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

Ricci Opens Up Businesses To More Lawsuits?

Via Mark Thompson, Ilya Somin argues that today’s decision in Ricci will potentially open employers up to even more lawsuits alleging race-based discrimination.

Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion holds that an employer may not use race-conscious measures to try to avoid “disparate impact” liability under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act unless it “can demonstrate a strong basis in evidence that, had it not taken the action, it would have been liable under the disparate-impact statute.” A disparate impact lawsuit is a case alleging discrimination by the employer on the grounds that its hiring or promotion standards disproportionately disadvantage minority applicants, even if the employer wasn’t deliberately trying to discriminate against them.

The Court’s ruling makes life more difficult for employers trapped between the Scylla of Title VII disparate impact liability and the Charybdis of “disparate treatment” suits by white employees (”disparate treatment” suits are cases alleging traditional intentional racial discrimination). If a business adopts a race-neutral hiring or promotion standard that results in few or no minority hires or promotions, it is potentially vulnerable to a disparate impact lawsuit. As several Supreme Court cases make clear, that can happen even if the business was not intentionally trying to disadvantage minorities. But if the business adopts race-conscious measures to try to shield itself from liability (e.g. - by practicing affirmative action, adopting a standard that is more favorable to minority applicants, and the like), it opens itself up to “disparate treatment” lawsuits by whites, such as one the filed by the New Haven firefighters in Ricci.

To avoid this dilemma, business groups have long sought to persuade the courts to interpret Title VII to shield them from liability for race-conscious hiring policies that are intended to prevent disparate impact lawsuits. The Equal Employment Advisory Council, a group representing numerous large corporations and other businesses, filed an amicus brief in Ricci urging the Court to rule for New Haven for precisely this reason.

The five conservative justices weren’t buying that argument, however.

Not having had an opportunity to read Ricci yet, I won’t evaluate Somin’s argument–I just found it to be an interesting one.

| Subscribe to RSS Feed | Permalink | Send TrackBack
  Show comments here »
 

Search OTB
Lijit Logo
OTB RSS Subscribers via FeedBurner

For Advertising Info, write
otb@blogads.com

FOLLOW US

ADVERTISERS

OTB MEDIA

OTB Gone Hollywood

OTB Sports

Allie is Wired

ATLANTIC COUNCIL

New Atlanticist Atlantic Council Blog

AFFILIATIONS

blog radio

Photo: 2006 Winner Best Blog

The 2008 Weblog Awards

MBA Member

ADVERTISERS

VETERAN'S ALERT

In addition to uncertain healthcare services, economic disadvantages, and finding a place to call home, veterans certainly do not need any more challenges. Unfortunately, the wounds of war can be less obvious than those that we can see. Psychological disorders and sicknesses caused by toxic exposure can be the most damaging aspects of war that veterans bring home. Toxin exposure in particular is of particular concern as previous exposure to asbestos among veterans is causing incidence of the aggressive cancer mesothelioma to rise among former members of the armed services. We must not leave those who risked their lives for our nation in the cold. Our veterans have never questioned the right or wrong of war when it mattered most. They simply did as they were trained. We must now show the same unwavering determination, in all ways we are able, by affording those opportunities to which they are entitled, including financial, medical and emotional support to all veterans.



Visitors Since Feb. 4, 2003

All original content copyright 2003-2009 by OTB Media. All rights reserved.