'Unoccupy' Thanksgiving

Tax-paying citizens from New York to Oakland have patted themselves on the back as law enforcement agencies finally moved into parks across the country to at long last oust 'Occupy Wall Street' (OWS) protestors from these downtown venues.  Cries of "About time!" and "Well done!" undoubtedly greet police and politicians alike as city residents take stock of the damage and take the measure of the clean up efforts that will required to put things in order.  Hearty congratulations ring all around as in what curiously seemed an almost organized effort to free downtown venues from the grip of an ill-conceived and unwashed mass of humanity.  (OK, maybe not mass, but more than a gaggle and less than a herd.)

Curiously (or perhaps not so), few wondered at how so many different municipalities, many with divergent political outlooks and party control, managed to have come to the same conclusion all but simultaneously.  Being by nature a cynic and a skeptic however, I was unable to accept this.  I found that I was uncomfortable with and curious about such timing.  Coincidence is a thing of dime detective novels and not the way that cities are run; so there had to be something else.  Then it hit me ... Thanksgiving!

What would the image of NYC be if the Macy's parade were held with the potential specter of OWS protestors appearing amongst the crowd, or (worse yet) on camera during the broadcast?  How many of the normal crowd of onlookers might be persuaded to pass up a trip to Manhattan to avoid running into some of the more odious (and odorous) of the 99%?  How would the image that Mayor Bloomberg and the city desperately wanted to portray as welcome and safe be affected by crowds of the disaffected attempting to get their message across?  And I'm sure that New York is not the only city to have considered this.

How many other cities around the country are having 'Holiday Parades' that they would prefer not to have hampered by these rag-tag and ill smelling protestors?  How many cities fear the effect on downtown tourism in an already bad economy if it were known that an OWS group were on hand somewhere?  How, for example, would Kansas City's famous turning on of the Plaza lights be impacted by the shadow of disreputable, dirty, and foul-smelling people attempting to take center stage (and that's just the politicians).     

I'm sorry to rain (almost quite literally) on the parade of those whose mostly unwritten and unspoken (except in the privacy of their own homes) demands have been to take back their cities from this movement without apparent cause or purpose; but the horrible truth of it is that the right thing has been done in cities across the country once again for no better reasons than municipal vanity and seasonal greed.  

Not only do these cities not want their worst foot put forward when most on public display, but they certainly don't want a hint of impairment to a season of rampant consumerism in the way of holiday parties at expensive downtown hotel and restaurant venues, and seasonal shopping that accounts for the lion's share of profit for retail outlets in an already down economy.  

Making the move when they did allows cities to clear out and clean up the mess left behind by protestors to whom sanitation was yet another word that their expensive educations had not permitted them to grasp.  Plenty of time was left to hose downs parklands and sidewalks, dispose of the make-shift tents and trash, and process the human debris arrested on misdemeanor charges for refusing to move along.  Thanksgiving crowds will likely even find smiling city workers to greet them on their arrival next week; those workers having already given considerable thanks for recent hefty paychecks (including overtime earned during the clean up) that they have received for their disinfecting efforts. 

Yes, it seems likely that rather than the praise that we would like to heap on our local government, we may be forced to settle for measured disdain.  Altruism probably had little or nothing to do with the ultimate decision have those of OWS move along.  Instead it was invariably political expediency, vanity, and greed that motivated those ostensibly in charge to do what we all knew must be done some time ago.  We may nevertheless take some consolation, as we occupy prime seats for these holiday celebrations, that the unwashed part of the 99% has 'Unoccupied' Thanksgiving.

. 

Stabilizing The MCP

For most of my life, I've kept a Miscellaneous Crap Pile on or near my desk.  It was comprised of tidbits of information gathered that I found enlightening, interesting, or simply bizarre that I hadn't yet managed to find a use for. I knew however, that sooner or later, most of the collection could or would contribute to the greater good.  And while not quite so precariously piled as the image depicted, that MCP needed periodic review to increase its stability (something around here certainly needs some increase in stability), to determine what actually still remained in the pile, and whether the aging process had caused items to either pass their expiration date or produce something that could or should now be consumed.

While there is a physical MCP that must be addressed at Just Blowing Smoke, there is a mental one as well.  In it are any number of ideas that I have about subjects that I always think I want to get around to writing about, but never seem to find the time or the right hook required for the piece to actually do so.  Considering its location, the stability of the pile is seldom considered; storage capacity however has increasingly become an issue.  There was little enough to begin with, and my continued predilection to fill it with useless information doesn't help things.  Since spreading useless information (like fertilizer) is what we live for at JBS, perhaps it's time to share some of these tidbits.

Those at the head of the uprisings cleverly dubbed the "Arab Spring" are now assuming power.  In sharp contrast to the pronouncements about seeking democracy and freedom from despots that the mainstream media attempted to convince us was the goal of these movements, all now seem intent on adopting Sharia Law as their cornerstone of government.  Strangely however, having apparently misjudged, misrepresented, and missed the boat on the goals of these movements; that same media is now curiously silent as what they initially deemed a spring falls back on demonstrably restrictive principles and a kind freedom that the Spanish Inquisition would be proud of.  I wonder in the days ahead if some of them won't look back with fondness on the days living under the tyranny of dictatorship that they have now escaped.

While restrictive practices are returning to the Middle East, their end may be seen in yet another place here in the Midwest; as voters go to the polls in Ohio to vote on Issue 2 which seeks to end the stranglehold that public-sector unions have on government in this state.  Curiously, those against this Issue seem only capable of defending policies which are bankrupting cities, counties, and this state by the use of what is known in NW Ohio as "half-truths, mistruths, and outright lies".  Also curious is that after accusing those in favor of the issue of funneling outside money in to break unions in Ohio, we find that those opposed to Issue 2 are outspending those in favor by almost 4 to 1; most of which has been funneled into their coffers from out-of-state unions.

(I have to note here that I have been getting robocalls from the AFL-CIO for weeks now, urging me to vote no on Issue 2.  What fascinates me is that these calls never come from a number in Ohio, that their efforts are wasted since I now live in Kansas  and cannot vote on it, and that their calls are pre-recorded as opposed to using a live union employee.  Is it a lack of solidarity that causes them not to use a union employee, or can they simply not afford to pay someone scale to make the calls?)

Kansas City parents are facing a curious educational dilemma these days.  The Kansas City school district recently lost its state accreditation, and the support of much of the community; especially those with students in it.  It's unlikely that this situation will be resolved quickly, quietly, or cleanly; as far too much time is currently being spent on accusations and recriminations about who's at fault and faretoo little on how to repair the damage.  Parents cannot hope to find relief from the Parochial school system in KC however, as the increasing uproar over priests and alleged child-abuse continues.  One priest is under indictment, and three others are facing some tough questions.  Even the bishop of the KC diocese has been indicted on a misdemeanor charge for failing to turn information over to authorities in one of the cases.  Talk about being between 'the devil and the deep blue sea'!

And how would such a clean up be complete without talking about the 'Occupy Movement' whose areas of occupation in most parts of the country could do with a bit of cleaning up themselves?  What can we say about these intrepid idealists braving increasingly inclement weather without proper shelter; desperately seeking social justice and egalitarianism (I wonder how many of them know what that word really means), while likewise searching for a WiFi connection and a cup of coffee from Starbucks (one can normally be found at the other BTW)?  Perhaps what we should say is that those who apparently didn't get a marketable education in college are now getting a rather brutal one from 'the school of hard-knocks'.  Theft, assault, and rape occurring in these encampments are not the lessons I would have wished for them however, in spite of the fact that I am a supposedly evil Conservative.  

Idealism and a desire for change are often the last notions that the real world manages to batter out of us on the path to maturity (a path BTW, that I am unwilling or incapable of following).  Age, time, and responsibility will have their way soon enough without giving humanity's worst elements and predators the opportunity to further disillusion if not permanently scar them.  My only advice is for those of you out there (who will probably never see this) is to take a closer look at the world and adjust your target identification systems.

One more bit I should mention is a farewell to fellow Curmudgeon Andy Rooney.  At age 92, Mr Rooney managed to precede me at attaining room temperature by passing away yesterday, hopefully by as many years as he preceded me at attaining the position of 'grumpy bastard'.  It was a role for which he was perfectly suited in both appearance (Who can forget those eyebrows?) and temperament.  He had a wry wit and a great delivery that annoyed while enlightening, which is the highest aspiration of any in our trade.  If there is a heaven, has probably  already secured a great spot inside from which to bitch about things.

.

The Future of Government and Higher Education?

.
Many in the 'Occupy' movement are complaining about the burden of student loans that they have after leaving an institution of higher learning. Having completed a degree in English Renaissance Literature or Sociology (and not paid attention during those boring economics courses), they are only now discovering that their investment in higher education is not going to pay the dividends that the broker (Admission's Counselor) encouraging them to speculate led them to believe.

Now finding themselves so underwater on college loans that they will never be able to achieve the American Dream of being underwater on a mortgage, they (like many homeowners) look to the government for relief.  Like many in banks, auto manufacturers, and green energy companies, they would like some assistance to help them survive the piling of one bad loan upon another, in their own form of investment 'bundling'.  It is their contention that government's involvement and intervention is not only preferable, but essential.  Some even go so far as to say that government should provide such education as a 'right'.

(Am I the only one who's noticed that the group constantly asserting 'rights' are those on the 'left'?) 

While not normally being one for capitulating to the demands of those with little in the way of logic and reason on their side (evidently these too were courses mostly ignored).  There are times when one must seek a more compassionate perspective; and I am willing to expend the effort required to do so.

Oh I don't believe that these loans should be forgiven.  Personal responsibility is something that society should prize, and not allowing them the opportunity to accept responsibilities for past mistakes and pay back legitimate financial obligations would be doing them a serious disservice.  I am willing to concede (or accede, as the case may be) to their cries for government intervention in higher education if that is the path that they wish to take.  In fact, I believe that some of the proposals that progressives in both education and government have told us for many years have reaped great rewards in society as a whole should be used as a model of such intervention.

I therefore propose:

* Reducing or eliminating much of the funding in pure research at universities that sees no likely immediate return.  Like that done for defense or space exploration, most could be done away with in the name of attempting to maintain the costs of operation within reasonable growth percentile.  There should likewise be a National Research Board to strictly monitor and regulate what research is done and who will do it in the name of fairness. There's no point in having one university duplicate the research of another .... that's simply inefficient.  Ultimately we need to recognize that Professors are after all teachers; and teachers get paid to teach, not financed for working on a patent that could make them rich.  

* A National Board of University Departments would have to take control and come up with rules to cover the regulation of all university departments, their budgets, and even their necessity.  I'm sure that a mostly college-educated bureaucracy could come up with a set of guidelines in enough annoying detail for even the most prestigious of universities to be able to understand and follow.  Just as with research, it would be inefficient to have too many colleges too close to each other, duplicating the departmental offerings of others.  Certainly some form of government regulation could relieve some of this duplication and function in as efficient a manner as say, government regulated railroads.

* A National College Housing Authority will be needed institute rent controls for dormitories across the country.  Student housing is a classic example of people living on minimal (or even borrowed) income that need affordable housing.  It would not be fair to let universities take advantage of this need through market regulated pricing structures when so many are in need.  Additionally, universities should be mandated to provide low-income housing to any and all students that require it as a measure of egalitarian compliance.  Something will likewise have to be done in regards to food for these students, but that can be addressed by further regulation and bureaucracy after the housing issue is addressed. 

* Perhaps a National Tuition Board should be appointed as well.  Colleges like Princeton, Harvard, and Yale simply cannot be allowed to charge whatever extravagant prices for their offerings they choose, regardless of the services they offer or the potential advantages that a diploma issued by them provides.  To do so would hardly be fair to those to whom it's not available.  Of course it's possible that they could allowed to continue to charge what what the market will bear for their product (perish the thought), but only if no federal money in the way of grants, loans, subsidies, or funding in any way, shape, or form is provided to the university.  If even $1 is accepted by any part of the university, they too become subject to the rules of a faceless bureaucracy that probably graduated from far less grand institutions (and in the bottom half of their class). 

* Of course, all of this leads to the logical conclusion that in fact a Government Board of Admissions would also be required.  You can't just have people taking government money for education and spending it wherever they chose.  A government regulatory board to apportion admissions to all universities using that money would be required.  Through the use of government efficiencies and 'mandated fairness' to determine the placement of students, a sufficiently egalitarian method of placement could replace the current unfair method of having them simply choosing a school based on its educational expertise, the pleasant nature of the campus, or whether the student feels that an education in such a place would be enjoyable.

You know, if we are going to in effect, nationalize higher education, perhaps professors should be put under government employment standards while we're at it.  Based on teaching ability, education, and testing, they would be granted government occupational pay levels or 'grades'.  University Administrators would likewise be given government ratings to provide an equitable level of compensation for all of those in salaried positions.  Of course such strict structures as the granting of 'tenure' or allowing paid leaves like 'sabbaticals' would need to be done away with, as they would hardly fall within existing federal employment guidelines and compensation plans.  Professors would however, have a government pension to look forward to; and at least be able to compete on a equal footing for advancement once they reach the 'full-performance level' of their existing position.

I can't help but wonder how many professors would be out in the quad protesting in solidarity with their students if such a double dose of of their demands were granted to them?  I wonder how many of those universities would allow them to do so if they understood that the strong arms of federal bureaucracy were about to tightly embrace them?  I wonder how many of those students would be protesting if they knew that new federal regulation and restriction on their choices was going to be the likely result?  Then again, perhaps among the other things that they have yet to learn is that with government funding comes government control.  But such would inevitably be the case for the future of government and higher education if those in 'Occupy' get their wish.

. 

Higher Education

.
You know, you have to sympathize with the complaints of some of the recently graduated college students in the 'Occupy' movement.  After all, leaving the safety of protection of the academic world after 4-6 years, only to find yourself saddled with a debt equivalent to the purchase of a small home in the Midwest can be a rather startling revelation.  Discovering that this encumbrance has provided you little in the way of earning collateral, since your degree in English Renaissance Literature has as much value in the real world as one in Underwater Basket Weaving can be unnerving.

Listen, I can feel your pain.  Back in the days when I was seeking a degree in Philosophy (and no, Socrates and Aristotle were not teaching then, but I think Descartes was), I remember how interesting the courses were and how exciting and fun it was to be learning things that I'd never dreamt existed.  Fortunately for me, I was waylaid in my quest for ultimate knowledge by a professor at the University of Missouri at Kansas City from whom I was taking two courses from at the time.  Though not my academic adviser (who curiously enough, I never met during my time at UMKC), Dr. Minton took the time to patiently explain to me that my Bachelor's degree would do little more than qualify me to sort mail at the Post Office.  He further explained that I would need both a Masters degree and Doctorate to pursue the one job open to such graduates, becoming a professor like him.  Soon after that, I left school forever to pursue the full-time employment in the printing industry that led me to where I am today.

(Of course looking back, getting a job at the USPS in the mid 70's would have meant that I could have been retired by now with a pretty decent pension, instead of having to restart a career after the all but demise of the daily newspaper business; so I should probably be a little pissed at the man.  He at least did me the favor of explaining the hard realities of the world to me however.) 

Knowledge is a beautiful thing in and of itself, and continuing education is a goal to be pursued, not a destination to be reached.  Nor is the process limited to the academic environs of a university and the structure of a classroom.  I have achieved far greater knowledge and insight in the last few years under the tutelage of friends now living in Virginia or still living in Toledo than I did in many of the years before (Thanks Brian and Maggie).  With no more instruction than, 'if this is what you believe, figure out why and keep your thinking logically consistent' and 'here's the title of a few good books you might want to read'; they sent me on a voyage of discovery that will likely never end. The cost of this instruction by the way, has been that of the books themselves, and the treasured and all too rare opportunity to provide reimbursement to those instructors through the purchase of an adult beverage.

I understand that not all were or will be as fortunate however, and the cost of a college education continues to rise.  While the rest of the world is suffering in the economic malaise and many commercial concerns are seeking strict cost cutting measures, the world of academia seems to be living a far different existence.  Many universities across the country are building new dormitories to provide what most would consider 'high-end amenities' to current and prospective students.  Sports facilities, long a source of contention between academics and alumni, likewise continue to be erected or upgraded in an effort to attract the best and brightest on and off the field.

At a time of complaints over the reductions of aid to education by states already strapped for cash is demonized, pay continues to increase for both instructors and administrators.  Here in Kansas, the Board of Regents approved modest increases of 1.8% for all; but in spite of the tough times, slightly larger ones for some who they felt were being paid less than their peers.  Kansas State's Kirk Schultz's pay will go from $350,000 to $400,000, President of Pittsburg State Steve Scott's compensation will go from $213,000 to $248,000, Hays State's Ed Hammond's pay will jump from $222,860 to $255,200.  By comparison, the increases of University of Kansas Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little from $425,000 to $432,650 seems hardly worth mentioning (except that she's making over $400k); as does the increase of Wichita State University's Don Beggs from $277,160 to $282,150.  (And don't get me started on the pay of full professors, the madness of  the tenure system, how much of their responsibilities they delegate to TA's and graduate students, or the concept of paid sabbaticals.)

I know that Universities, like other businesses, seek to attract the top flight administrators; and compensation is certainly a way to do that.  While recognizing this necessity however, I cannot help but deplore what at best is an example of poor public relations and at worst an almost intolerable insensitivity to current economic realities shown by such compensation packages. 

Perhaps those camped out and sleeping under tarps in places where they aren't allowed to do so might want to redirect their faulty target identification systems from the fat cat bankers who loaned them the money for an education they can't find a use for to the institutions of learning that accepted that borrowed money in what they believed was a legitimate contract to provide them with not only an education, but a future.  (A situation which has apparently been solved now by insuring that most if not all student loans in this country will come henceforth from the government.)  Perhaps they might also set their sights on those in Washington DC who strangely seem oblivious to the fact that education costs have been going up at rather startling rates lately.  

I fear however, that until we either stop telling young people that they need a college education to succeed in life, or start telling everyone in this country that tuition rates have been going up at twice the rate of inflation since 2000, those entering universities around the country will indeed be seeking and getting a 'higher education'.


.

The Top 1% Win Because They Play

Didn't being in the top 1% used to be a good thing?

I remember my years in high school (difficult to forget, since Gutenberg had just invented movable type) when were given standardized tests.  I took up the challenge of the PSAT, the SAT, and the ACT with relish as part of the college application process certainly, but also to measure myself against other students in the nation in a similar position.  Seeking and achieving a higher score in these tests was not only a source of pride, but assuaged the need to compete that I felt.

After my halcyon days of education and standardized tests were over, I was left to find new ways to measure myself against my fellow man.  Advancement in career was certainly a part of that, and being granted additional responsibilities was certainly a source of pride; but a job title never paid the rent or bought groceries.  No, it was financially that we ultimately measured ourselves against our contemporaries (and even many whose station was above ours).  In fact, I remember telling many a new salesman during their training period that commission checks were not only a justly earned reward for the hard work that they did, but a great way of keeping score.

Competing wasn't limited to work, and contests with peers on the simple electronic games of the time were always a part of the fun.  From 'Pong' and 'Donkey Kong' in those earlier days, to Role Playing Games (RPG's) like 'World of Warcraft' to 'Lord of the Rings' more recently, pitting ones skills against other players and those who write the rules (especially when you figure out the tricks and shortcuts) was eminently satisfying.  And while I'm not as good as some in my clan, I keep score and try to improve my standing.

It's with this in mind that I view the misguided thinking of the whole 'Occupy' movement.  Somewhere in the midst of being caught up in a twisted entitlement mentality, they've come damn close to something, but failed to grasp it.  Yes, the top 1% is getting a lot of the breaks these days; but it's not capitalism that's at fault for all of the world's problems, but crony-capitalism.  After all, we've had capitalism in this country since it was founded, and the disparity that they claim to so disparage has only become an issue in recent years.

What changed?  Certainly it isn't the principles of capitalism itself.  Capitalism is only an economic system in which the private ownership of the means of production and distribution is maintained.  It's a system where anyone can own both physical and intellectual property, and the score is kept based on how much of both you have.  Now maybe I'm wrong, but what they appear to object to is their inability to play the game by what they consider 'unfair rules'.

What they fail to grasp apparently, is that this game that has worked for centuries is increasingly being rigged ... by the government created to protect it. This doesn't make those bending the rules to the point of breaking (or hiring someone to do it for them) worthy of praise, but neither does it make them into maleficent demons.  What it does make them is pretty damn good at scoring points on a real-life strategy game with some pretty twisted and always changing rules. But like most of the electronic RPG's out there, the players don't write the rules.  No in this case, that's done by those clever little programmers in Washington DC and by their pals the lobbyists, hoping to get a jump at getting to and staying at the top of the pile.

Is the tax system rigged?  Of course it is. It's a set of originally simple rules that gets more complicated every time someone in Washington decides to 'fix a bug' in it.  Hell, even the IRS cannot and does not understand the thousands of pages of tax code that they are supposed to enforce. But if you want taxes to stop favoring the rich, simplify the tax code!  Take out the ponderous pages of rules, regulations, incentives, loop holes, and deductions so that there's nothing to take advantage of.  Join with Conservatives that have been pushing for years to see a 'Flat Tax' with the same rate for everyone or 'Fair Tax' based on the consumption of goods.  No exemptions, no deductions, and no tax-free investments for anyone.   (And oh by the way, without a complicated tax system, we'd need little or none of the massive IRS bureaucracy and the money we waste on it.)  

You want to fix the banking system, don't let the government add to the already ponderous regulation that it works under (and under which it collapsed), then bail them out when they flip a coin that says "heads I win, tails you lose".  Get the legislators and lobbyists out of the process and tell them that they're a business like any other.  Tell them that if they gamble their (our) money on risky investments and lose it, they will go bankrupt.  And tell them by the way, that they'll be going to jail as well for doing so, and have every personal asset they own confiscated to settle the bill.

You want foreclosures to end, then shut down government interference in the system and government run Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well.  It was government regulation that convinced people to buy houses they couldn't afford and forced banks to lend them the money to do so.  It was government regulation that allowed the bundling investments that burst the housing bubble.  It's complying with government regulations that is hindering with clearing up the paperwork so the system can reset itself and move on.

You want to fix Wall Street, then stop letting Congress write regulations for its operation that allow the most egregious offenders to speculate without putting real money up.  You want major corporations to act responsibly, then yank the government safety net out from under them.  Stop the taxpayer funded incentives, the subsidies, and the legislative picking of winners and losers; and make the system run with little government supervision and no support.  Everybody from people who run trains to those who build cars knows that right now they can continue to operate under practices that are not and cannot be self-sustaining, and when the inevitable happens they can run to legislators under the 'too big to fail' scenario with their Oliver Twist suits on to beg for money.  Tell the government that it has to stop.

If nothing else however, remember that real capitalism is little more than a game with rules that you need to learn and understand.  And like any other game, it's one you can't expect to win unless you play.  Watching over the shoulders of others exerting themselves, and complaining that the rules won't let you compete won't get you into the game or take you to the next level.  So log in, get your password, and start playing with the rest of us.  Who knows, you might find that you enjoy this fairly realistic and rather challenging RPG far more than you thought.

And as for those you're trying to demonize for playing too well ... don't blame the player dog, blame the government writing and rewriting the rules of the game ...