Pro Commerce

Commercial Luddite™

This blog has two points. First I want to be on record as having invented the term commercial luddite™ (with and without caps). It doesn't come up on Google. The intended meaning is: a sympathetic term to replace anti-Americanism, anti-Globalism, anti-Commercialism and anti-Semitism.

Reading my blogs of the last few days, you can see that all of these loaded terms refer to the same rejection of the growth and spread of commerce. So I came up with a sympathetic term that describes the people who hold these tradionalist views.

Second, I added ™ to my new phrase as a joke. It has become all too common in our society to grab a traditional English word or term and claim ownership.

I received cease-and-desist letters from Green Grocers when I was involved with that type business. I've sent them to people who have used Greens Restaurant in other parts of the U.S. The whole issue of ™ for common words and phrases is stupid and foolish.

I offer the campaign to correct this stupid and foolish abuse of ™ to anyone who wants it. I have enough "change the world" projects on my plate.

Baby, soy alert

If you know someone who recently had a baby, send them to this page. The Israeli Health Ministry is concerned about six brain damaged infants who all had a German infant soy milk formula in common.

I noticed this issue because I worked for years on the GMO issue and founded the first American activist organization: Project to Label Genetically Engineered Food. There isn't a shred of evidence to connect the soy milk issue to GMO food. Germany doesn't produce or use GM soy beans.

The slight chance of a GMO connection to infant brain damage would arise if the product were made outside of Europe. If there is an effect of GM soy beans on humans, it would occur with infants first. That is why I noticed the article.

If I were a stock speculator I would sell short all GMO producers. That includes the pharmaceutical company that bought Monsanto's GMO division.

Bush creates anti-Americanism

I hadn't realized that President Bush's great speech on democracy is going to have awful effects. However, after putting up excerpts from his speech, I read Natan Sharansky's explanation of anti-Semitism in Commentary.

After reading the following ending to Sharansky's article, you can see why Bush has increased the level of anti-American hatred in the world. Europe included.

"Despite the differences between them, however, anti-Americanism in the Islamic world and anti-Americanism in Europe are in fact linked, and both bear an uncanny resemblance to anti-Semitism. It is, after all, with some reason that the United States is loathed and feared by the despots and fundamentalists of the Islamic world as well as by many Europeans. Like Israel, but in a much more powerful way, America embodies a different—a non-conforming—idea of the good, and refuses to abandon its moral clarity about the objective worth of that idea or of the free habits and institutions to which it has given birth. To the contrary, in undertaking their war against the evil of terrorism, the American people have demonstrated their determination not only to fight to preserve the blessings of liberty for themselves and their posterity, but to carry them to regions of the world that have proved most resistant to their benign influence.

"IN THIS, positive sense as well, Israel and the Jewish people share something essential with the United States. The Jews, after all, have long held that they were chosen to play a special role in history, to be what their prophets called "a light unto the nations." What precisely is meant by that phrase has always been a matter of debate, and I would be the last to deny the mischief that has sometimes been done, including to the best interests of the Jews, by some who have raised it as their banner. Nevertheless, over four millennia, the universal vision and moral precepts of the Jews have not only worked to secure the survival of the Jewish people themselves but have constituted a powerful force for good in the world, inspiring myriads to fight for the right even as in others they have aroused rivalry, enmity, and unappeasable resentment.

"It is similar with the United States—a nation that has long regarded itself as entrusted with a mission to be what John Winthrop in the 17th century called a "city on a hill" and Ronald Reagan in the 20th parsed as a "shining city on a hill." What precisely is meant by that phrase is likewise a matter of debate, but Americans who see their country in such terms certainly regard the advance of American values as central to American purpose. And, though the United States is still a very young nation, there can be no disputing that those values have likewise constituted an immense force for good in the world—even as they have earned America the enmity and resentment of many.

"In resolving to face down enmity and hatred, an important source of strength is the lesson to be gained from contemplating the example of others. From Socrates to Churchill to Sakharov, there have been individuals whose voices and whose personal heroism have reinforced in others the resolve to stand firm for the good. But history has also been generous enough to offer, in the Jews, the example of an ancient people fired by the message of human freedom under God and, in the Americans, the example of a modern people who over the past century alone, acting in fidelity with their inmost beliefs, have confronted and defeated the greatest tyrannies ever known to man.

"Fortunately for America, and fortunately for the world, the United States has been blessed by providence with the power to match its ideals. The Jewish state, by contrast, is a tiny island in an exceedingly dangerous sea, and its citizens will need every particle of strength they can muster for the trials ahead. It is their own people’s astounding perseverance, despite centuries of suffering at the hands of faiths, ideologies, peoples, and individuals who have hated them and set out to do them in, that inspires one with confidence that the Jews will once again outlast their enemies.

Bush's Gettysburg Address

Bush has put himself directly in the tradition of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln and Bush have a strong moral compass in common.

I knew Bush had a moral compass six months after he took office when he reviewed the issue of human genetic engineering and made a brilliant public speech explaining why no human or group of humans has the right to change the genes of the whole human population. As president, Bush has never waivered from this position.

Yesterday the UN General Assembly, in its own strange way, voted to support Bush on this moral issue if he is re-elected next year. He has the votes now but the UN doesn't want to give Bush credit on this issue.

In the strange world of politics the meaning of the UN's two year postponement on the vote to ban human cloning is not obvious. My translation is: Bush has the votes right now to pass the UN resolution, but the American Democrats asked their international allies to postpone any legislation that would strengthen Bush in the U.S. The Bush administration accepted the postponement because the Bush team is certain of winning next year's election and taking credit then.

This is my brief exerpt of George W. Bush's Gettysburg address:

"Historians will note that in many nations the advance of markets and free enterprise helped to create a middle class that was confident enough to demand their own rights. They will point to the role of technology in frustrating censorship and central control, and marvel at the power of instant communications to spread the truth, the news and courage across borders.

"Historians in the future will reflect on an extraordinary, undeniable fact: Over time, free nations grow stronger and dictatorships grow weaker.

"In the middle of the 20th century, some imagined that central planning and social regimentation were a shortcut to national strength. In fact, the prosperity and social vitality and technological progress of a people are directly determined by the extent of their liberty.

"Freedom honors and unleashes human creativity. And creativity determines the strength and wealth of nations. Liberty is both the plan of heaven for humanity and the best hope for progress here on Earth."

---------------------
"And the questions arise: Are the peoples of the Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism? Are they alone never to know freedom and never even have a choice in the matter?

"I, for one, do not believe it. I believe every person has the ability and the right to be free."

----------------------
"Time after time, observers have questioned whether this country or that people or this group are ready for democracy, as if freedom were a prize you win from meeting our own Western standards of progress.

"In fact, the daily work of democracy itself is the path of progress. It teaches cooperation, the free exchange of ideas, peaceful resolution of differences."

----------------------
"There are, however, essential principles common to every successful society in every culture.

"Successful societies limit the power of the state and the power of the military so that governments respond to the will of the people and not the will of the elite.

"Successful societies protect freedom, with a consistent impartial rule of law, instead of selectively applying the law to punish political opponents.

"Successful societies allow room for healthy civic institutions, for political parties and labor unions and independent newspapers and broadcast media.

"Successful societies guarantee religious liberty; the right to serve and honor God without fear of persecution.

"Successful societies privatize their economies and secure the rights of property. They prohibit and punish official corruption and invest in the health and education of their people. They recognize the rights of women.

"And instead of directing hatred and resentment against others, successful societies appeal to the hopes of their own people. "

Nukes on the horizon

On Tuesday the 4th, the WSJ had a review of a book about Richard Pipes. The book apparently mentions that post-Cold War document research has shown that the USSR intended to use nuclear weapons in the event of a land war. Richard Pipes was usually right; he was right about the USSR. I have long adored Pipes, his writing and his thinking. (The book review is not in WSJ.com) I also love his son Daniel who is just as prescient about Arabs and the Middle East as his father was about the USSR.

Today I read Gabriel Schoenfeld's discussion, in Commentary, on the current risks of nuclear weapons use by North Korea.

Put the two articles together and the message is that we will need to invade North Korea and disarm her. The strategy will involve support from China and Russia, the tactics will be related to next year's presidential election.

San Francisco is stuck in 1934

San Francisco voters passed a new law (Proposition L) that raises the minimum wage for people working in San Francisco to $8.50 starting February 4th. A year later the law applies to businesses with ten or less employees. The current State minimum wage is $6.75.

It is not clear from the data I have seen whether there are 25,000 workers in the City currently earning less than $8.50 or fewer. The confusing issue is restaurant servers who comprise about 13,000 workers. Restaurant servers, who are paid $6.75, earn tips worth two to three times that amount. I don't know if the 13,000 servers are in the 25,000.

I have two questions. (1) Why would this city, that has lost tens of thousands of jobs in the past two years and has lost every major corporate headquarters in the past ten years, want to make the situtation worse? (2) What can be done about the potential loss of more jobs due to the new law?

The answer to the first question is simple. This quaint beautiful antique scenic village is stuck in the past. The rich who live here, the rent controlled tenants and our thousands of government employees are looking out for themselves and they want to keep 'the perfect precious City' the way it is. Regardless of who pays the cost. Regardless that the lowest paid workers lose their jobs.

Vienna is stuck in 1914, the last year of that village's glory. San Francisco is stuck in 1934. 1934 was the year that San Francisco had a General Strike. The City was unified in its pro-communist, pro-union, anti-capitalist, anti-William Randolph Hearst, anti-scab days of glory. The strike failed but the City has glamorized those days of rebellious unity in its mental self image. Romantically the City is stuck in 1934 forever.

You think I'm joking. Bart was first proposed and voted on in 1952. It was defeated in San Francisco. It was blocked for 14 years because San Franciscans voted against it because one station at 3rd and Market might make the Hearst Corporation, located on that corner, more profitable. When the stop at 3rd and Market was moved to Montgomery and Market, the Bart vote passed handily in San Francisco.

That answers the first question.

The second question is easy.

San Francisco is teeming with illegal immigrant laborers and sweat shops. We will have more. Illegal workers are the only ones who don't complain publicly about wages or working conditions (fear of being deported). They will continue working below the minimum wage regardless of what the wage is. Welcome to San Francisco illegal immigrants. I personally am glad you are here.

In addition, aside from the modest proportion of businesses that will leave the city, the rest of the business community will find a solution. The reason is simple.

Business is about solving problems. A business owner gets up every morning facing ten or more new horrible and difficult problems. That is what business ownership is about. The higher minimum wage law is a new problem and business will solve it. I look forward to the solution. 60% of the citizens who voted, voted yes on this ballot measure. It won't be easy to overturn the law.

Interesting spam

About one out of a hundred pieces of spam seems to be about sex with animals. I keep looking for an article in the Wall Street Journal or the NYTimes, the newspaper of record, telling me how these bestiality sites are doing. Over the past four years the proportion of sex with animals spams have remained constant. What does that mean?

Wrong way Noam

Noam Chomsky and I went to a kibbutz at about the same time in the late 1950's. We both stayed on the kibbutz for a few months. I was at Kibbutz HaGoshrim in northern Galilee, he didn't say where he was.

We came to different conclusions.

Chomsky writes of his experience and his conclusion 'that human beings are not good enough for pure communism.' That experience has shaped his life.

My life has been similarly shaped by my observation 'that pure communism is not good enough to accommodate real human beings.'

Officially dead again

In my Oct 27th blog I officially declared that the Environmental Movement dead.

There were two things I didn't know at the time. First that PM Putin doomed the Kyoto Accords with his statement in September at a global warming conference, that Russia wouldn't sign the Accords.

Independent of the environmental issue, there is an important lesson here: the United States is the unitary power in the world. If you want to win a global battle you had better win it in the U.S. Senate, that is the only real battleground on the planet.

Second, the science behind global warming evaporated in September. The article is in the British journal Energy and Environment by Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick. They reviewed the key earlier paper by Michael Mann that showed the current heat increase was significantly greater than prior periods. McIntyre and McKitrick demonstrate that two well known earlier warmings, 900-1200 and 1600-1700 (definitely not man made, definitely not caused by industrial pollutants) were both warmer than the current warming period. Summary: natural forces, probably the sun, cause warming and cooling periods of greater magnitude than we have previously known and greater than anything we are currently experiencing.

Just for the record, I have denied the validity of global warming since I first read about NASA/Hansen's position when it was published in the 1980's. I wrote a memo to Steward Brand, for publication in the Whole Earth Review (it wasn't published), pointing out two observations: (1) I had looked at a continuous record of ocean temperatures over 2.5 centuries and with my well trained statistical eyes, couldn't see nor calculate any warming trend. (2) I had developed several computer models, with 50x50 variables, in the 1960's as a bank economist, and I had found building computer models of the U.S. economy (a process much simpler than a global weather model) to be useless for forecasting. Really useless.

Copright on the Internet

I read an article I liked. I put it on my website and sent the URL to my friends by email.

Problem is: this article is something I want to discuss with my literary friends. (Feel left out, want to see he article, click here).

If I made copies of the article on my copy machine and handed them to friends I wouldn’t be violating copyright laws.

By downloading the article onto the web and sending the URL to friends I am probably violating copyright laws because I have, in effect, made the article free to the world. I have made millions of copies.

Making millions of copies for the world is, in effect, destroying The New Republic’s rights to sell their magazine and violating the magazine's agreements with Zadie Smith.

Seems to be a conflict of my rights to discuss this article with my friends and the copyright law protecting the rights of the author to earn money from her work. The Internet has created a conflict of rights.

My suggested solution. Create articles that, after they are paid for, can be downloaded with a script that destroys them after 25 visits to the URL.

Yes, I’m in the Internet business; I know such a script is always breakable by hackers. So what? 99% of users won’t bother hacking the script and if they do they have a monetary purpose than could make a copyright legal pursuit worthwhile.

San Francisco is Fun

Halloween is the Castro District at night.

Many neighborhoods of the city specialize in Halloween. The Cole Valley district, where I lived in the mid-1960s, has about five blocks devoted to small children.

The Castro has about ten blocks for adults. The Castro used to specialize in flamboyant gays and lesbians. Now the Castro is for everyone in the City. And San Francisco is a cross-section of everybody. We don't statistically represent the world, that would be more like a Chinatown parade. But we are a vivid cross section of the world over 16.

The crowd was colorful, imaginative, calm and having fun with itself and each other. Strangers, strange and happy together.

-----------------------------------

My partner, a friend and I went to hear the Rosin Coven at the Cafe du Nord. Typical of old folks, we got there at 8 p.m. and the band started at mid-night after we saw three horrid acts; none pretended to be serious. We heard two numbers by the Rosin Coven, probably named because they have a drum set,
trombone, guitar and four string/bow instruments. They are part of the Burning Man family. I can't say enough about them. Be grateful you missed it.