"With Realism and Restraint" by Doug Bandow (Cato Institute: Commentary): "The botched effort suggests that the DPRK poses less than a formidable military threat. Gen. James E. Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, snickered: 'On the idea of proliferation, would you buy from somebody that had failed three times in a row and never been successful?'"
"U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon complained that the action was "not conducive to efforts to promote dialogue, regional peace and stability," as if those were North Korea's objectives."
"America should step back and let others take the lead in dealing with Pyongyang. A desperately poor, isolated state with an antiquated military, the DPRK poses far greater problems for its neighbors than for America.
Only South Korea is within reach of the North's army — a good reason for the U.S. to withdraw its troops, since they are not needed to safeguard the Republic of Korea. (Seoul enjoys a vast economic, technological, population, and diplomatic edge over the North.)"
"Finally, Washington needs to concentrate on changing the negotiating dynamic with North Korea before negotiating with Pyongyang. For years the DPRK has used brinkmanship to win concessions. The U.S., ROK, and other friendly states need to reverse this reward structure.
First, they should respond to the North's provocations with bored contempt rather than excited fear. Calling an emergency session of the U.N. Security Council sent precisely the wrong message to Pyongyang.
Second, rather than publicly whining about North Korea's actions, friendly nations should quietly inform Pyongyang that they will offer no benefits while it is ratcheting up tensions.
If the DPRK responds positively, however, Washington should offer diplomatic recognition and the end of trade sanctions, small concessions in areas where punitive policies have manifestly failed; South Korea should move back toward the "Sunshine Policy.""
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
"High-Speed Rail Is No Solution" by Randal O'Toole (Cato Institute: Commentary)
"High-Speed Rail Is No Solution" by Randal O'Toole (Cato Institute: Commentary): "Outside of the Boston-Washington corridor, the fastest Amtrak trains have top speeds of about 80 to 90 miles per hour and average speeds of 40 to 50 miles per hour. Obama proposes to boost top speeds to 110 miles per hour in some places, which means average speeds no greater than 70 to 75 miles per hour.
This is not an innovation. The Milwaukee Road, Santa Fe and other railroads routinely ran trains at those speeds 70 years ago — and still couldn't compete against cars and airlines."
"The environmental analysis report for the California high-speed rail projects costs of $33 billion for 400 miles, while the Midwest Rail Initiative projects costs of $7.7 billion for 3,150 miles of moderate-speed rail. That's $82 million per mile for true high-speed rail (partly because the California project goes through some mountains) and only $2.4 million for moderate-speed rail. All else being equal, high-speed rail will cost 10 to 12 times more than moderate-speed rail. A true, national high-speed rail network would cost more than half a trillion dollars."
"Americans who have ridden French or Japanese high-speed trains often wonder why such trains won't work here. The problem is, they don't work that well in France or Japan.
France and Japan have each spent roughly (after adjusting for inflation) the same amount of money per capita on high-speed rail as the United States spent on the interstate highway system. Americans use the interstates to travel nearly 4,000 passenger miles and ship more than 2,000 ton-miles of freight per person per year.
By comparison, high-speed rail moves virtually no freight and carries the average resident of Japan less than 400 miles per year, and the average resident of France less than 300 miles per year. It is likely that a few people use them a lot, and most rarely or not at all."
This is not an innovation. The Milwaukee Road, Santa Fe and other railroads routinely ran trains at those speeds 70 years ago — and still couldn't compete against cars and airlines."
"The environmental analysis report for the California high-speed rail projects costs of $33 billion for 400 miles, while the Midwest Rail Initiative projects costs of $7.7 billion for 3,150 miles of moderate-speed rail. That's $82 million per mile for true high-speed rail (partly because the California project goes through some mountains) and only $2.4 million for moderate-speed rail. All else being equal, high-speed rail will cost 10 to 12 times more than moderate-speed rail. A true, national high-speed rail network would cost more than half a trillion dollars."
"Americans who have ridden French or Japanese high-speed trains often wonder why such trains won't work here. The problem is, they don't work that well in France or Japan.
France and Japan have each spent roughly (after adjusting for inflation) the same amount of money per capita on high-speed rail as the United States spent on the interstate highway system. Americans use the interstates to travel nearly 4,000 passenger miles and ship more than 2,000 ton-miles of freight per person per year.
By comparison, high-speed rail moves virtually no freight and carries the average resident of Japan less than 400 miles per year, and the average resident of France less than 300 miles per year. It is likely that a few people use them a lot, and most rarely or not at all."
"Still a Nation of Laws, Not Men?" by Nat Hentoff (Cato Institute: Commentary)
"Still a Nation of Laws, Not Men?" by Nat Hentoff (Cato Institute: Commentary): "Moreover, Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which has been made part of our law, requires that any person — whether a prisoner of war, unprivileged belligerent, terrorist or noncombatant, is guaranteed freedom from 'cruel treatment and torture' and 'outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment,' including denial of process in case of trial.
These guarantees, Mr. President, apply 'in all circumstances' and 'at any time and in any place whatsoever.'"
These guarantees, Mr. President, apply 'in all circumstances' and 'at any time and in any place whatsoever.'"
Taking Secession Seriously–At Last | Front Porch Republic
Taking Secession Seriously–At Last | Front Porch Republic: "Of course it is true that the particular secession of 1861-65 did not succeed–but that didn’t make it illegal or even unwise. It made it a failure, that’s all."
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Using a black hole as a mirror to see our past
Could a black hole be used as a mirror to see our sun's (or planet's) past?
http://www.springerlink.com/content/q4h73n0763720106/ seems to show that it is a possibility.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/q4h73n0763720106/ seems to show that it is a possibility.
"Black-Market Schools" by James Tooley (Cato Institute: Commentary)
"Black-Market Schools" by James Tooley (Cato Institute: Commentary):
One mother told us: 'I have two children who joined this school since their nursery level and they are still in this school today. I see them doing good in subjects. Their time and subjects are well planned; they spend time well and are taught all subjects. . . . For those reasons this private school has impressed me a lot. I have saved money and cut many costs of my maintenance in order to bring children in this private school. Even though people might question why I send children in private school while there are free [government] schools, I am concerned with high-quality subject teaching offered in this private school.'
One mother told us: "People thought education is free; it may be free but children do not learn. This makes the quality of education poor and that is why many parents have brought their children back here. People got their children out of the private schools to the public schools because of free education.... However, the children do not learn; all they do is play."
One father summed it all rather neatly as to why he still preferred private schooling for his daughter rather than what was provided free in the public school: "If you go to a market and are offered free fruit and vegetables, they will be rotten. If you want fresh fruit and vegetables, you have to pay for them."
The Health Czar Can't Calculate - Edgardo Tenreiro - Mises Institute
The Health Czar Can't Calculate - Edgardo Tenreiro - Mises Institute: "under central planning any rational economic calculation, that is, any method to efficiently allocate resources, is practically and theoretically impossible — not just of higher cost, lower quality, and reduced innovation; not just uncoordinated, inefficient, and ineffective; but literally impossible.
In practice, a health czar would have to evaluate the quality, revenue, and cost of complex production processes, and billions of healthcare goods, services, hospitals, pharmacies, nursing homes, surgery centers, diagnostic centers, laboratories, outpatient clinics, home health agencies, hospices, long-term-acute-care hospitals, ambulances, patients, physicians, nurses, therapists, and clinicians, all across geography and across time. The health czar must therefore consider an almost infinite number of permutations in order to correctly allocate trillions of dollars."
In practice, a health czar would have to evaluate the quality, revenue, and cost of complex production processes, and billions of healthcare goods, services, hospitals, pharmacies, nursing homes, surgery centers, diagnostic centers, laboratories, outpatient clinics, home health agencies, hospices, long-term-acute-care hospitals, ambulances, patients, physicians, nurses, therapists, and clinicians, all across geography and across time. The health czar must therefore consider an almost infinite number of permutations in order to correctly allocate trillions of dollars."
EC wants software makers held liable for code | Business Tech - CNET News
EC wants software makers held liable for code | Business Tech - CNET News:
Do paper plates have to be guaranteed for 2 years?
Why not let the consumer choose how much of a guarantee they want?
Right now, under the current EU Sales and Guarantees Directive, physical products are expected to carry a guarantee of two years. Extending those terms to software would have the effect of limiting customer choice, as contract terms would have to be extended to a minimum of two years, Mingorance added.
"Extending the scope would force the businesses to maintain update services for such contracts beyond the contractual term and ultimately limit the choice of offers," the BSA director said. "It is like renting your house for a summer month and being then obliged to extend the rent for another 23 months."
Do paper plates have to be guaranteed for 2 years?
In addition, Mingorance said that extending consumer regulation to software could lead to less interoperability between software products, as manufacturers might decide to limit how far third-party developers could access their code.
Why not let the consumer choose how much of a guarantee they want?
Texas Mom Who Put Fetus in Fridge Gets 22 Years for Child Injury and Endangerment - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
Texas Mom Who Put Fetus in Fridge Gets 22 Years for Child Injury and Endangerment - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com: "A mother of nine who was arrested after authorities found a dead fetus stored in the refrigerator of her filthy home is headed to prison for 10 years on that charge"
Why 10 years in prison for having a dead baby in the freezer?
Why 10 years in prison for having a dead baby in the freezer?
Pelosi: I Was Told Interrogation Methods Were Lawful - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com
Pelosi: I Was Told Interrogation Methods Were Lawful - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com:
It isn't a question of legality -- it is a question of morality and prudence!
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insisted Friday that she was briefed only once about the 'enhanced' interrogation techniques being used on terrorism suspects and that she was assured by lawyers with the CIA and the Department of Justice that the methods were legal.
It isn't a question of legality -- it is a question of morality and prudence!
In addition, from the beginning of the program in 2002 until it became public in the fall of 2006, the House held 13 votes to authorize intelligence funding at which time no one objected or demanded changes to any intelligence programs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)