California, Culture, and Immigration

Nice article:
http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_1_california-demographics.html

Civil War was about slavery

(Posting here so I can reference it easily)
And even better than my writing below:





I'm not going to engage in a debate here.  But I will not let widely held but ignorant beliefs be stated without correction.

Anyone who reads contemporaneous documents on the subject will see it was entirely about slavery.  To believe otherwise after reading them takes an act of deliberate ignorance.

No matter what political hyperbole or revisionist history is applied, it came down to a battle to "Preserve the Union (in order to end slavery)" or "State's Rights (to continue to enslave humans)."

Perhaps the four best documents on this matter are the Ordinances or Declarations of four of the southern states themselves in which they lay out the reason why the wanted to secede from the Union.

These aren't the anonymous postings of pamphleter, nor are they an editorial of a single newspaper, a personal letter, or writings of a single author.

These are either Public Acts or explanatory notes that accompanied the Acts, adopted either by a referendum or by a convention lawfully called and assembled.  I can't think of anything that speaks to the sentiment of the people better then the documents they themselves voted to approve, or the Representatives they chose voted to approve.

Mississippi Declaration of Secession: http://www.civil-war.net/pages/mississippi_declaration.asp

In the momentous step, which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. 

South Caroline Declaration of Causes of Secession:  http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/secession_causes.htm

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

Georgia Declaration of Secession: http://www.scribd.com/doc/47469194/Georgia%E2%80%99s-Declaration-of-Secession

The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with theGovernment of the United States of America, present to their confederates and theworld the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have hadnumerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederateStates with reference to the subject of African slavery. 

Texas Ordinance of Secession:  http://www.lsjunction.com/docs/secesson.htm

...was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits...
The controlling majority of the Federal Government...avowed purpose [is] acquiring sufficient power in the common government to use it as a means of destroying the institutions of Texas and her sister slave-holding States.

Apart from the Ordinances, CSA Vice President Alexander Stephen's "Cornerstone Speech" of March 1861 laid it out as:

The new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions—African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away... Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."

Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition.

As I said, I'm not here to debate.  There is nothing for reasonable men to debate -- the words of the people of the time are clear and unambiguous.  To claim the Civil War was about anything other the slavery is as ludicrous as to state the Sun sometimes rises in the west and sets in the east.

Utilizing Genius

Nifty article on managing geniuses:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tech-manager/what-to-do-with-the-underutilized-genius-on-your-staff/7239?tag=nl.e101

We're a Network

More and more I realize we're a Network -- and it's the skills at administering that system (and the natural resiliency built into that system) that matters most.

Here's one great article from The New Republic:
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/99521/america-world-power-declinism

And another good one on how the changes happening to how we train and recruit new workers:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204422404576596630897409182.html

Many of the changes in the 2nd article date back to something mentioned in the 1st -- when faced with a stagnant economy circa 1987 American business began a ruthless restructuring that has maintained our share of the world GDP at around 25%.  But we haven't completed the "rewiring" of our Network to from one dominated by long-lived Corporations to one in which jobs and companies have much shorter "half-lives" before they decay.

Healthcare Costs

Because I'm not sure were else to save the spreadsheet I just made... Healthcare & Food Expenditures, % GDP:

2010 Healthcare Food Total 

United States: 13.9 6.8 20.7

Switzerland: 10.9 10.2 21.1

Germany: 10.8 11.4 22.2

France: 9.4 13.5 22.9

Canada: 9.4 9.1 18.5

Australia: 9.1 10.5 19.6

Belgium: 9 13 22

Average 10.35714286 10.64285714 21

The Exasperation of a Billionaire

Nice interview in the Wall Street Journal with Mortimer Zuckerman.

'It's as if he doesn't like people," says real-estate mogul and New York Daily News owner Mortimer Zuckerman of the president of the United States. Barack Obama doesn't seem to care for individuals, elaborates Mr. Zuckerman, though the president enjoys addressing millions of them on television.

Reminds me of a personally favorite line from Mad Men, when Roger Sterling says to Don Draper, "The reason you're no good at relationships is you don't value them."  Obama strikes me as one with a few (very few) but deep relationships.  The rest, he doesn't value; not in a personal way.

His narcissism is fundamentally different then that of Bill Clinton.  Clinton, genuinely, feels peoples pain.  He likes to shake hands and meet folks.  It's personal.  Of Obama I get the impression of someone who understands that folks are hurting through the lense of policy decisions.

That's the difference when Zuckerman talks about pain (people wanted costs controlled) and policy (but Obama instead made expanded coverage a priority).  Obamacare makes more sense from a policy position if you believe in healthcare as a public service; it doesn't make sense if you look at it politically or within the financial situation of 2009/2010.  When people were feeling deep and severe pain, Obama's actions were primarily in long-term policy areas -- Obamacare and supporting previous government policies that expanded state and local government by funneling "stimulus" money into preventing layoffs in areas that program costs had exceeded the ability of state and local governments to fund them.

Striking the right balance between the emotional and the rational is difficult.  A lot of people are far stronger on one then the other.  Favoring rational thought, however, can leave you blind to emotional factors that are just as critical to good leadership.

(Side note -- besides his comments directly on Obama, his real estate transactions starting in 2006 seem to be a good example of Positive / Negative Black Swan investing; by selling the buildings that would have a negative impact by a Black Swan -- the bubble bursting -- they put themselves in the position to have strong cash reserves and buy a couple premium buildings at discounts when the economy did crash.)

Lie Spotting

Nifty TED Talk by Pamela Meyer.  What I found fascinating was that contempt is the only emotion that's asymmetric -- that must have interesting implications for the left/right brain split, and also the left-gaze bias of humans and canines (looking at humans):

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/P_6vDLq64gE?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>