Travis In Austin

More cowbell

Candygram. What is that, I don't know. What the hell is that.

That is really cool. Where was that? Did you see her perform a full set or does she do a couple of songs these days?

Looks like a lot of snow and very cold.

So did you go check it out? Pick up anything?

Very well said. Special interests above "We the people."

When you look at the action, and then you look at the rhetoric, you realize there is a disconnect. It doesn't take too long to discern that the rhetoric exists to get people elected, while the actions(and results) are what the people actually stand for. For example, conservatism and conservatives say they stand for small government, and lower taxes. When they actually run government, though, it grows by leaps and bounds. Like wise when they say they want to lower taxes, they actually lower taxes that benefit themselves, create more loopholes for the upper tier of taxpayers so they can pay less, and throw out a piece of cake that the relative poor will receive an added benefit of enjoying the trickle down crumbs of what accidentaly falls out of someone's pocket. What we end up with is larger government, less tax income and larger deficits, people trying to spin what conservatism IS, and more jobs created by expanding WEALTH where folks ask you whether you want your extra value meal supersized. It doesn't compute. I like this, very well stated. People take positions they think are liberal or conservative, but which are in fact the opposite.

You are confusing what some conservatives want or have done with what conservatism IS.Roger I'm not confused, "conservative" politicians are confused. Read William F. Buckley, the father od modern conservatism is this country, a true conservative. He was a staunch supporter of civil rights, eliminating antisemitism, and advocated for the legalization of all drugs. Travis

You stated pretty much what I found. Although it can indicate future demand, there is no way to tell if dips are caused by over supply of shipping vessels. I also saw that China had a lot of impact, both on demand side, and supply side by ship building. That index is for bulk goods only. There is another ondex for container ships which shows a slow steady climb.

Joesph McCarthy was a conservative Republican in the 50s. So was Nixon. On the issue of governmental intrusion, protection from police intervention, what some people call "liberty" was primarily established by what are considered "liberal" courts. Erosion of those protections are generally considered to be the result of "conservative" court decisions, with the exception of Scalia's decisions relating to the right of confrontation. As it relates to what police are able to do, or not do, it is primarily derived from conservative court decisions. The problem with mixing economic conservatism, eliminating welfare state as you refer to it for example, with social/religious conservatism is you cannot be all things to all people. You have to compromise on every issue. "I will support your tax cut and cut welfare, but you have to support my farm subsidy bill. I will cut medicare but you have to support support auto bailout. It seems everyone is conservative unless it effects their state or district. Then trades are made, which is called politics. Speaking of television, it revolutionized America, an in, it was a revolution. It has been credited with costing Nixon the election, causing an outrage in the North upon seeing treatment of blacks in the South leading to Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, and video from Vietnam every night on TV, the first televised war, cut off support. An "idealistic state" in the 50s, if you were white and male I guess so. I loved Andy Griffith, all of his shows, including Matlock. But TV isn't reality, it is entertainment which is an escape from reality. I'm a "true" "conservative", I want small government, I want it out of my life. If someone wants to drink, smoke pot, or whatever else it is nobodys business what they do in their own home, including their bedroom if consenting adults. I dont want government being in the religion business, how I worship and where is none of their business. What happens between a patient and a doctor is nobody's business. If I want a gun in my house that is no one's business either. Of course, there are other conservatives who tell me they want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can tell doctors what they can and can't do. Then I have other conservatives telling me they want want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can control what happens in people's bedrooms, in school rooms. I have other conservatives telling me we need to conduct surveillance and collect data on people. I amswer them all the same, you don't like abortion, it's a moral issue, I don't need to pay government to teach religion or morals. Same sex marriage, mixed race marriage, mixed religion marriage, moral and religious questions, I don't want to pay government to do that. The freedom "to be let alone" is what I want. Then again, no man is an island.

Except GM and Exxon have to be on board, they are not going to look at it and walk away. The guy with the horse who bought a Model T owned the car. Safety has NEVER been a primary motivating force in the selection of automobiles. For some it is, and they buy Volvos. What you are envisioning I am 100% for, and want it now. If I understand, when I need to go to work or the store I get on my phone and punch in where I am, where I am going, and when and when it is time to leave I go outside and an automated vehicle is waiting for me. I hop in, I don't touch a thing and it takes me where I need to go. I assume the rates are at or below what it would cost to own and operate a vehicle. I'm also assuming a family who wants a larger to go on family vacation to Disneyland cross country can order a bigger car and pay higher rates if they choose. I want it now, and I want will all electric cars for local, and hybrids for long distance. Of course what this is clearly nationalization of ground transportation. That's socialism Dave, and for some reason we have never been able to get on board with that outside of war time. Even then, they wouldn't let em takes over the steel plants. The only thing I am aware of in this country is the post office (it is in the Constitution so it is pretty much requured), and Amtrak. Or do we adopt a national protocol and let private sector compete against each other to drive down rates. Of course if Google car is patented they have monopoly for next 15 years. A car I didn't need to operate, no steering wheel, no brakes, just an emergency button, I want now, today. A statewide or national mandate they be used is a long time in the making. A model where you no longer have a car, where the government or utility owns the vehicle, is going to be a pretty tough sell. I think you can get us city dwellers on board easy enough, but try to sell that in Tyler, TX, or Billings, Montana, or rural America and you are going to have a tough sell. They still ride horses there. A model you suggest would have an added benefit of having a significant reduction in crime. Anyone using a vehicle in crime would be traceable. In order to have any chance of commiting a crime it would have to be done on foot. Biometrics could be required to utilize the vehicles. If someone with a warrant gets in one the doors lock and fugitive is driven to jail. The government would also know who is going where at all times. Who is working, when, where. Where you shop, where you eat. It wouldn't bother me, I'm not a criminal and I could care less if anyone else knows when or where I go. I hope they sell America on it quick, I have a feeling there are a few minor issues to get sorted out aside from the technology. Travis

What are we looking at here? Is this a scan of a hard drive? If so what program does this?

You should be a conservative or a Republican because it is the Left that is primarily responsible for ALL of the F'd up changes!Roger Fact checK. Primarily vs all, which is it, primarily or all? "ALL the changes." Which changes? As far as police shootongs, one only need to look who wrote Graham v. Conner.

I am afraid to read that article, just like I am afraid to watch "Fast Food Wars" based on what I have heard it uncovered. Subway being made out of yoga mat material. I thought no way, that has got to be a hoax. My quick go to source for an instant BS test is SNOPES. Comes back true. I heard that someone had asked Subway what their bread was made out of, got the stall, sent it to a lab on their own. Several years ago I was reading the the label on a loaf of bread, and I am going down the list, whole wheat flower . . . and then saw "sawdust." I couldn't believe it, had to check it three times. Not particlized cellulose or some other watered down version, just "sawdust." I was a fast food fiend for years and years, I just almost completely avoid it now, (well, I am assuming that Franklin BBQ is not considered fast food) but you have to be just as careful with processed foods at the grocery story. Curious myself I went to Snopes and could not find a mention of yoga mats/Subway. Have a link Travis? New or used mats I stand corrected, I was in a bar one day having cocktails when yogamat popped up in conversation and someone also mentioned that "antifreeze" was in Fireball Whiskey. I SNOPESed the antifreeze claim and at the same time someone read the from the Subway site that they acknowledged using a particular chemical which was, safe, nontoxic, and approved by the FDA and then someone said that it got started with a petition on the internet and the ingredient was originally listed by Subway but was discovered by private testing. I think I confused the fact that SNOPES confirmed that propelyne glycol was in Fireball at a level that resulted in a ban in a country with the conversation about the yoga mat controversy.

No possible response to that. Deny demonstrated science if you wish and try to believe your reactions are faster and better than a computer and that 58,000 deaths per year is acceptable, 600,000 preventable injuries is fine, and all the associated immediately eliminable loses are OK with you. I have a collection of kerosene lamps and I keep the wicks trimmed but I really don't expect to need them soon nor do I consider them superior to LEDs and thankfully they aren't likely to kill as many people as your prediction. Dave That is besides the point, this country is pretty solidly built on private ownership of property, anythink else is a taking. I dont doubt the technology exists, I saw it operate in San Diego. It was big news there and then went away. What is the cost of the car, who gets them? Who builds them? Who pays for the training to operate one. Are they going to need infastructure built in the roadways? Perhaps I am not understanding what you envision. Lets say we have ourautomated car. The ones in SD could turn on their own because of markers on the sides of the road and sensors in the road. The cars are buildt and ready to ggo, do individuals purchase the vehicles, if so that is private ownership. Does the government buy them and make them available to everyone? is that full time use or do you schedule a car to arrive at your house automatically? What if the demand exceeds availability? Are non-automated vehicles allowed on same highway during the transition. If not, it is a government taking and they have to pay cost of vehicle. What is cost of vehicle, cost to upgrade existing vehicle? Will a consumer be able to sue the manufacturer if the car malfunctions and injury or death occurs? Travis

I've never seen a car that drinks so this is nonsense. What the heck are you talking about? Dave The NTSB report on automated automobiles suggests that more training and higher standard for licensure will be required, somethin akin to a CDL. When ever that happens the std for alcohol usually becomes tighter, an .08 to an .04, or even zero tolerence, meaning no detectible amount, like for minors in Texas. They could even require interlock devices where you blow before you can start ignition. Automation will require less physical ability, But more mental ability. You will never see a lifting of drunk driving laws with the advent of automation, certainly not before a level 4 automation. They preformed lengthy demonstration on San Diego I-15 and we are nowhere. I had an MB with active cruise control which was really neet, and could be set to scare ya to death, but I haven't seen anything else. We are at zero percent implementation now, it would take 10 years to achieve maybe 25 percent participation. You could bump that way up with tax incentives, like they did with Hybrids. Because of such inherent safety you could eliminate need for insurance and make that another benefit. Regardless of how soon, they will be privately owned. We don't believe in shared or community ownership here Texas, or anywhere else., You have to get Exxon to sigh on so they don't lobby to kill bill because of hybrids. Automakers will be all for it, a subsidized vehicle, can't ask for anything better than that. Did I understand these were going to go to the poor and elderly also? They could all be Uber drivers, gainfully employed in order to collect social security or welfare. It will be interesting to see what they can offer and at what cost on the horizon.

Just adding up what I can on wikipedia, deaths from police per year:2012 321 2013 320 2014 593 Why was last year nearly twice as many? Unfortunately, the data is unreliable because it isn't uniform and reporting isn't mandatory. Even it the data was reliable, it would only tell half the story. It assumes that the police are not are not facing a growing number of public who are willing to threaten deadly force against law enforcement. Here is just one article about the data, I have dozens more. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/dec/03/marc-morial/are-deaths-police-shootings-highest-20-years/

The vast majority of Americans believe it too, across all political spectrums.NASA believes it, NOAA believes it, Based on science. 90 plus percent of the peer reviewed studies on AGW find that warming has occurred and it is man made. The ocean is warming, because it is the heat buffer, and is more acidic in terms of pH due to CO2. The clear step is to reduce carbon emissions. The measurement is CO2 in atmosphere. Levels are not all voluntary, coal burning plants pay a huge carbon tax NOW for not having most efficient scrubbers. There are some people today, I have met them, believe smoking is not harmful because they are 80 and still smoking; don't believe seatbelts are safer; and there are also some who believe we never actually went to the moon. There will always be people outside the mainstream, for whatever reason. How soon and how much the impact will be I guess all is up to debate. I think technology and the environment might converge and be synergistic for a change on this automated vehicle concept. Electric or hybrids that are fully automated seems to be a win-win. Travis

We're in violent agreement here. Other than collectors and aficionado who will keep their Mustangs...but have to summon an automated carrier to get them to a place where it's legal to drive them...I don't think many people will "own" a car or truck within 20 years...maybe sooner. They'll simply be part of the infrastructure, summoned when needed, dismissed when not. It won't be just groceries, it will be all consumer goods. That first edition of Pink Floyd one of us throwbacks order will show up in a couple of days by a variety of efficient vehicle transfers and that new roll of OLED for the HT will arrive within hours. Mark was the one who initially said it here in a sig line, but there are times when I am not sure he really gets it: "Pay attention. The fundamental things are changing." Dave Won't own a car in twenty years or sooner? That presupposes that Ford, GM, Toyota pack up and go away quietly, well maybe one sticks around to make automated vehicles. Do you think Exxon/Mobil is going to sit around quietly. We have had automated car technology for 15 years, it was demonstrated on I 15 in San Diego in '97. The NTSB designates 4 levels of vehicle automation. They indicate that a special license will probably be required for added training necessary to operate an automated vehicle. That means it will probably require zero drinking, and zero tolerance. Ever wonder why all the hype about automation in the 90s and it fizzled out. It was backed by DOT not by automakers. In order for it to be viable it has to be subsidized. Either a tax break for buying automated vehicles, or a penalty for not having them. Remember clunkers for cash? I think private vehicle ownership is probably safe in this country for at least 50 years.

They will switch over to representing police officers in shooting cases, or oil and gas.

I didn't say they obtained their values or sense of value in B school. Let's please be careful. I said they learn "bad values" there (new ones, overriding their old ones). My argument has been that our society is suffering under the horrendous values of capitalism writ large. That in fact, the extreme profit seeking of the past 30 years is creating misery where none belongs in such a wealthy nation.How did this new viscous profit seeking arise? It arose in the nation's premier business schools where the arts of "financialization" were invented, along with the distorted values needed to implement them. What distorted values you ask? How about "too big to fail," for a start? That's the embrace of a very powerful and very socially evil value system which seeks to cover private losses with public funds. A reverse Robin Hood. That was held as a value of all the largest WS operators. Let's find a few others, lest you think I was overstating my case. How about the securitization and sale of known defective loan bundles under the cover of caveat emptor? How's that for values? The invention of the mortgage securitization system was that of the "quants" coming out of Harvard B school. The values here are that real economic activity is unimportant in comparison to synthetic economic activity, as long as the profitability is huge, and the action stays one step ahead of the SEC. It's a combination of theft with obfuscating the activity to prevent SEC scrutiny. We might as well cover another bad value, which was capturing the regulatory body to prevent over sight while crimes were being committed. These B school big brains plunged the world into suffering not seen since 1930 while chasing higher profits. That they are not all in prison right now is a poor reflection on the VALUES of our justice department, who chose to spit in the public face, and declare that these people were above the law. More bad values compounding here, this time from our law schools. They lied. They cheated. They stole. They bribed. And then held the entire nation hostage by threatening us all with even deeper disaster unless we paid them off. What kind of values are those? Our financial system in the 2000s was stocked with the best and brightest of these quants directly out of the premier B schools. Yes, they arrived to school with normal and typical American values, but left with new dangerous and evil values that directly plunged the world into a near disaster. Are you unaware or unsympathetic to the millions who lost their jobs and were booted to the street from their homes because of what these brilliant new titans of Wall Street "valued?" I guess I am now wondering where you have been living for the past 10 years? Not in America, I presume. A massive criminal conspiracy operated on WS for two dozen years and brought the country to near death. It was run not by some gun toting gangsters, but diploma toting Big Brains, with despicable values learned from our nation's premier institutions. And, they're still free to continue wreaking havoc on the economy. THAT'S what's not fair. Oh I can assure you I have been living here, but I don't limit myself to a ten year window. Where I am at is with Howard Zinn. The values you describe were present in the 1500s when The Prince was written, and they were present during the founding and development of our Nation. What has occurred over the last ten or twenty years didn't start then, it has always been. I know that your values, from reading your posts over the last ten years, are nearly identical to mine, and my reaction to the results are the same as yours. However, I think it unwise to believe that what we are seeing now is the result of of business or law schools. Carnegie and Morgan never went to business or law school, although Mellon was a lawyer and judge, none of them learned what they in fact created. Have you been to Hearst Castle, the summer "cottages" in Newport, Jekyll Island? Zinn discusses how that wealth was created, the CEO's of today are mere amateurs compared to those guys. Kenneth Law had a PhD in economics from the University of Houston, grew up in MO where he received his undergraduate and masters degree. He didn't learn his "values" from business or law school. It is like saying people from Scotland have been taught bad values. Congress has the power to change bad values, the Sherman Act, Taft-Hartley. Congress is us. We are to blame for whatever ills we perceive from Wall Street, corporate america, or whatever else. You don't learn values in graduate school, and you certainly don't learn bad business practices there either. Schools, of whatever kind, are not to blame. CEO's come from every type of educational background and schooling. The answer is not the education of CEO's, and to direct efforts in that regard, in my view, is a waste of time for those that really want to change things. Travis

Why would you think that? Border patrol agents have been using lethal force against rock throwers for years. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-border-shooting-20141019-story.html#page=1 "Border Patrol agents fired their weapons in 960 encounters over the last eight years, according to Border Patrol records. Including Arevalo, 30 people were killed, with at least 10 of those in incidents alleged to involve rock-throwing and eight on the Mexican side of the border." The border patrol has just been ordered to pay a man 500,000 for shooting a man. However, the border patrol agent didn't appear to have credibility and may have taken a bribe in another case. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/judge-lawsuit-border-patrol-shooting-excessive-force-28895701

Jeff Buckley, the day before he is to start recording his second album he goes for a swim and drowns in a tributary of the Mississippi.

Our CEO corps comes out of these prestigious B-schools. That's not too arguable. Our current CEO culture has a set of values that can be assessed in aggregate by examining the state of business. It's not therefore a stretch to correlate the teaching of those schools, with the results we see in the business community. Fair? Not fair, and the assumptions which flow from that faulty premise defy logic. People don't learn values in graduate business schools, law schools, medical schools, high schools or even primary schools for that matter. A person's sense of values, their moral compass if you will, is established long before graduate school, probably before middle school even. I don't pretend to know why people do what they do, but you don't need to go to business school to be a bad person, unethical or greedy. I don't know if it is because of our economic system or if we are hard wired this way because of DNA or our creator. A since of self-preservation seems to hard wired in us, and when it comes to self-preservation people do the stupidest crazy things. People have done far worse things to their fellow man that lie, cheat and steel to get money. The studies of the psychology of the buyer by Robert Cialdini which led to his six influences is pretty spot on in what motivates buyers. Are people basically good, or bad? I don't know, that is a question better to Hobbes (Levithan, basically evil), Locke (blank slate) and Rousseau (social contract, basically good). The world's great thinkers and philosophers have been thinking about this for a long, long, time. But I do know this, it does not take much, at all, for people to be evil, for almost no money at all. Most people are aware of the following two psychological studies, but for some reason they so easily forget their implications. I think this is we don't want to think what we are capable of. Stanley Morgan's electrocution study. Research subjects believed that were zapping somebody in an adjacent room that they could not see, but could hear screaming. Some refused to keep going, some were hesitant but only need to be told by an "authority" figure that they need to keep going, and they did. Sixty-five percent (65%) of the subjects went up to the maximum of 450 volts shocking their fellow man, or so they thought, by just being told they needed to do it. Throw money in the equation and how hard is it to get a CFO to cook the books of Enron? Zimbardo's Stanford prison experiment. Two equal size groups of students were selected as "guards" or "prisoners" and put in a simulated prison at Stanford. Anyone could quit at anytime. The guards began to abuse the prisoners. Troublemakers were put in solitary confinement, made to sleep on floor etc. The experiment had to be ended early because of the treatment by the guards. None of the guard's reported any of the abuse of their fellow guards. The Prince, when viewed as satire, which I think it was, points out all the human failings which prevent a monarch from being good, and because of human failings, the compromise of a republic is necessary. I think you can look at those perceived failings of a monarch and apply them to the potential of a CEO. Some monarchs might be truly good, just as some CEO's might be good, but human nature does not allow for most monarchs to be good, nor CEO's to be good, thus, there has to be a system of accountability, of oversight. What is surprising to me is that we have to learn these lessons, over and over again. The term regulation is tossed around as an evil word, yet it assures our safety, our health, and helps assure our pursuit of happiness. We deregulate and problems happen. I have not run across David Korten before, I am going read his works to see if they goes beyond the generalities and offer suggestions for realistic change. A "values based" operating system is certainly admirable, and I would love that to be the reality, but there has to be a mechanism to accomplish that, putting aside for the moment the deeper questions of what values and who's? If he has realistic suggestions for solutions I will probably be his biggest fan, if not it is just fiction or philosophy, and there is plenty of that already on this subject. Travis

If any one is interested in where the standard came from and how it came about you can go to this link to the landmark case, Graham v. Conner. http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_87_6571 There is a link to the full written opinion, along with recordings of the oral arguments. Graham was reaffirmed in Plumhoff v. Rikard last year. You cannot understand how police shootings are reviewed and why cases are indicted or not unless you read, as a start, Graham.