Wild night

We had a pretty wild night here in northern Texas, and the weather outside is still very unsettled.  We've been warned to expect more storms throughout the day and into tonight.

Yesterday evening, when I headed for Old NFO's place for our regular Thursday night get-together, there were five big green garbage bins (the wheeled sort, supplied by the trash collecting company) strewn in the road between our house and the nearest intersection, tossed there by the wind as if they were mere child's toys.  I came back home and put our bins in the garage before setting out again, because I could see we were likely to lose them if I didn't.  The gathering broke up early, too, what with weather warnings blaring from our cellphones, and everyone went home to batten down the hatches.

Just a couple of months ago, we had new gutters installed, and improved the drainage system down one side of the house to better handle heavy rain.  Well, last night's storm was so heavy that it broke the new gutters, which are hanging from their brackets at one joint, allowing water to pour out.  The new drainage grate has been literally ripped out of the ground and upended by the force of the water, and the pipe leading from it to the bottom of our property has been lifted out of the trench dug for it for at least half its length.  I knew flood water had a great deal of power, but I must admit, I'd never expected runoff down the side of our house to get that strong.  The contractor will be here in an hour or so to inspect the damage, and see about fixing it.

To make matters worse, Miss D. learned yesterday afternoon that a relative has died.  We're going to have to spend a couple of days on the road, driving up for the funeral, and the same coming back home again.  We'll do our best to have things as ship-shape as possible before we depart, but serious repairs will have to wait until we get back.

Those of you in the storm-threatened areas of northern Texas, Oklahoma and southern Kansas today . . . take care, will you?  This storm system is nothing to fool with.

Peter

Security warning for users of HP laptops

If you use a HP laptop computer, or if friends and family use them, you or they may be affected by a security issue that's recently cropped up.  Sky News reports:

Security researchers have discovered that a feature installed in a number of HP laptops is recording all of the keystrokes that the laptop users make.

In capturing everything users press on their keyboards the software is recording sensitive information, and by saving that information in an easily accessible file the researchers claim that it is potentially exposing users' passwords to attackers.

According to the Swiss cybersecurity group behind the research, Modzero, the feature wasn't designed to spy on users - but it was implemented in such a way that it records everything users type.

This means that from the moment a user logs into Windows on affected HP laptops, every key they press, including to enter passphrases for online banking and email accounts, is recorded and stored.

. . .

HP told Sky News: "Our supplier partner developed software to test audio functionality prior to product launch and it should not have been included in the final shipped version. Fixes will be available shortly via HP.com."

There's more at the link.

I checked my own laptop last night, and sure enough, the keylogger files were there.  I deleted the files, then used Windows' Device Manager to update the driver to HP's new version.  That appears to have fixed the problem.

You'll find details of how to check your own computer here.  I used it to check mine, and its methods worked.  ZDNet has more technical details of the problem and its fix here.

Please check your own computer as soon as possible, and please pass the word to your family and friends to check theirs.  I guarantee you, hackers are even now trying to figure out how to access the key log file on your system (if it exists), and copy it to their own servers, where they can analyze it to see whether key financial information, passwords, etc. was recorded.  If they find it, you may wake up one morning to find your e-mail compromised, or your bank account accessed, or any of a number of other nasty outcomes.

Peter

Hard at work

I achieved something of a milestone today in our settling into our new home in Texas, even though it's taken me more than fifteen months since we got here!  I've finally finished opening every single box that we brought down and stored in the garage.  I've been discarding everything we don't need (as a rule of thumb, if we haven't needed it since we got here, out it goes, headed to the local thrift store).  Things we do need, or things of which we have multiples (how the heck did I end up with five - five!!! - corded drills?), have been sorted into larger boxes and stacked to one side.

(Yes, I know many of you would rather I was busy writing.  Sorry about that, but with my current kidney stone problems not yet dealt with, I'm popping more painkillers than usual, and I find my creative muse takes flight while they're in my system.  Not long now, I hope.)

So far I've emptied (permanently) more than 30 totes, which are all stacked to one side, and no less than 67 cardboard moving boxes, all of which have been flattened and tossed out with the garbage. Some of the empty totes will be used to receive the things we need as I sort them out from the larger boxes, and stored on shelves.  A few of the rest will be stored against future need, while the remainder will go to friends or the thrift store in due course.

Because of the semi-itinerant way we've lived since getting married, I've had boxes I packed in Louisiana for our move to Tennessee, and never opened since.  Doing so now has been a real eye-opener.  For example, I've just finished sorting through all the flip-top ammo boxes I've accumulated over the years.  Apart from those actually in use, I had almost a hundred empty ones!  I've filled a small tote with a reserve of a few boxes for each of my major cartridges, and tossed all the rest into a larger tote.  I'll let our friends pick them over for anything they need, and probably take the rest to Blogorado in October.  I'm sure our shooting buddies there will help dispose of them in short order.

As a matter of fact, I might have to pack a couple of totes with 'door prizes' for everyone at Blogorado.  I've got far more than I need in the way of flashlights, knives, holsters, ammo boxes, magazines, and so on.  (When and where did I pick up a dozen or so early-model straight-sided 20-round M16 magazines, and why?)  If I can free up thirty or forty good items, I'll take them all up with me in October. We can have a "Pick one as your name is pulled out of the hat" sort of event one evening (followed, I daresay, by heavy bargaining and swapping, which is half the fun!).

Peter

Captain Capitalism tells it like it is

I'm sure many of my readers know the blog 'Captain Capitalism'.  It's written by Aaron Clarey, who has a somewhat cynical, iconoclastic view of life, the universe and everything.  I don't agree with everything he says, but I think his views of the present state of the economy are pretty accurate - even though I'd prefer to think the future is potentially better.

At any rate, Mr. Clarey has just released his latest book.  It's called 'Poor Richard's Retirement:  Retirement for Everyday Americans'.

The title is clearly a play on Benjamin Franklin's 'Poor Richard's Almanack', as the cover illustration makes clear.  If you're familiar with Mr. Clarey's oft-espoused views on how to live in today's economy, there won't be much new material here for you.  However, even though I know his views well, I still found it valuable to have this condensed summary of them at my fingertips.  Furthermore, although the book is written with the American economic situation in mind, many of its principles apply equally well to other countries.

The blurb reads:

Don’t have enough money saved up for retirement? No problem. Never started a 401k or IRA? Don’t worry. And are you so far behind in your personal finances you’re worried you’ll never be able to retire? It’s all good. Because whether you know it or not, the entire US retirement system is horribly flawed and was doomed to fail anyway. And that’s why every American needs to read “Poor Richard’s Retirement.”

“Poor Richard’s Retirement” is a revolutionary retirement system because, unlike today’s conventional retirement planning, it works. It puts retirement easily within the reach of your everyday man. Whether you have student loans, a mortgage, are behind in your retirement planning, or have no retirement savings at all, “Poor Richard’s Retirement” bypasses it all by showing you how little you truly need to retire. And it does so through the simple truth that happiness is not found in $400 yoga pants, luxury SUV’s, McMansions, or whatever lies they’re selling you on TV, but through love of family, friends, and your fellow man. All of which are free.

It's a very short book, but pithy.  Some may find his economic views and proposals simplistic, but I'm here to tell you, they work.  Miss D. and I have been trying to live that way since long before we learned of Mr. Clarey's existence.  It's brought us relative peace of mind, when many of our friends were struggling in a financial trap that was, all too often, self-made.

If you're worried about preparing for retirement (or even if you're already retired), and aren't sure how you're going to afford to live for the rest of your life, I highly recommend this book.  Adjusting to its recipe for success may be difficult for you, but I promise you, it's more likely to work than any other prescription from so-called financial 'experts', who (all too often) want to use your money to continue to prop up their status quo.  Even better, 'Poor Richard's Retirement' is inexpensive.  It's worth its purchase price, IMHO.

(No, I'm not getting any compensation or kickback for recommending it.  I've bought my own copy, with my own money.  I bring it to your attention because I like to share good ideas with my readers - and this book has a number of them.)

Peter

How wake turbulence nearly killed a planeload of people

Back in March I reported on the case of a Challenger business jet that was caught in the wake vortex of a mammoth Airbus A380 over the Indian Ocean.  The bizjet was so badly damaged that it had to be written off after an emergency landing, and everyone on board was injured, some of them seriously.

More details have now emerged of the damage caused to the smaller aircraft, including this picture of the interior.

That's some pretty spectacular damage.  Note the bloodstains, too.

Flight Global reports:

... the Challenger's captain, who had been flying, told the German-led inquiry that the aircraft had "shook briefly" before rolling heavily to the left. Its autopilot disengaged and the crew had manually attempted to stop the roll with right-bank input.

"But the [aircraft] had continued to roll to the left, thereby completing several rotations," says German investigation authority BFU.

. . .

The flight attendant told the investigation that she had been standing in the cabin before the upset, and four of the six passengers were also not seated.

"In her recollection the [Challenger] had turned three times around its longitudinal axis, during which the occupants had been thrown against the ceiling and the seats," says BFU. "Several of the passengers suffered injuries, some of which were bleeding. She herself suffered minor injuries."

Inspection of the aircraft after it landed at Muscat showed damage to the seats and panelling, and "traces of blood", the inquiry adds. Armrests on four seats were deformed or fractured and two oxygen masks had fallen from their housing.

One passenger suffered head injuries and a broken rib, while another had fractured a vertebra. Two other passengers and the attendant had injuries including bruising and a fractured nose.

There's more at the link.  It makes interesting reading for aircraft buffs.

The Challenger exceeded its structural limitations during its fall after the incident, and was so badly overstressed that it had to be scrapped after it landed.  Those aboard were very, very lucky to get back on the ground in one piece . . .




Peter

Yay! - and thank you all very much for your support!

A few weeks ago I mentioned that, thanks to your support in their reader poll, I'd won the Conservative-Libertarian Fiction Alliance's award for the Book of the Year for 2017.  It was awarded for my first Western novel, 'Brings the Lightning'.

Today, this showed up at my door.

Yay! Thank you all very much for voting for my book.

I'm going to follow Larry Correia's example (he won the first CLFA Book of the Year award, last year). He won't enter future competitions, because he believes that others should get their chance at the title. I agree with him, so I'll also leave the field clear for others next year.

Nevertheless, I'll savor this year's award - my first as an author. It's a nice feeling.

Peter

Do we have a government, or a gaggle of pants-wetting hysterical kids?

I'm getting more and more angry at politicians grandstanding to and for their electorate, and seriously damaging the USA and its institutions in the process.  This applies to both sides of the political aisle, and to everyone from the President, to Senators and Congressional representatives, to State and local governments, to (it seems) temporary acting unpaid deputy second assistant dog-catchers.  The rot seems to have spread throughout our body politic.

If adults are supposed to be mature people, I venture to suggest that almost every politician we've got, Republican or Democrat, is not mature, and should be sent back to political and social kindergarten until they've learned how to behave.  We expect kids to throw temper tantrums if their wishes and desires are thwarted.  Witness children in the supermarket.

"Mommy, I want that chocolate bar!"

"No, you can't have it.  You'll spoil your supper."

"WAAAAAHHH!"

Witness kids in a car.

"Mommy, Johnny touched me!"

"Johnny, stop that."

"But Jenny touched me first!"

"I don't care who touched who first - both of you, stop that!"

(Both kids, simultaneously) "WAAAAAHHH!"

Isn't that precisely what we're seeing from our politicians in Washington D.C. right now?  "Impeach (name of politician)!"  "No, charge (name of politician) with (the crime of the accuser's choice)!"  "Investigate this bureaucrat!"  "No, investigate the people who hired/tolerated/fired him!"  Some politicians want this, or that, or the other thing, and threaten to hold other legislation or government business to ransom unless and until they get it.  Others demand that the heads of their political opponents must roll, ignoring the fact that their own politicians are just as guilty, just as venal, just as corrupt, as those on the other side.  It looks like nothing more than a pack of kids demanding to play with the American people's ball on their turf according to their rules, and denouncing as "Unfair!" anyone else's desire to do the same thing.

I don't know what the answer is.  I suppose this may be the ultimate proof of Joseph de Maistre's maxim that "Every nation gets the government it deserves."  (All I can say is, we must have done something awful bad to deserve the government we've got now!)  I also suspect this proves H. L. Mencken was right when he said, "Each party steals so many articles of faith from the other, and the candidates spend so much time making each other's speeches, that by the time election day is past there is nothing much to do save turn the sitting rascals out and let a new gang in."  We've certainly got a prime gang of rascals in Washington right now - and that applies on both sides of the aisle.  If the position of the Democratic and Republican parties were reversed tomorrow, in terms of who controls what elected body, I suspect we wouldn't see much practical difference at all.

One of the real tragedies of this situation is that good men and women increasingly avoid elected service to the people.  I can't blame them.  When they know that announcing their candidacy will instantly result in their being put under the partisan political microscope;  their every thought, word and deed since birth will be analyzed to a fare-thee-well in the hunt for evidence about their views and positions;  and their family life, personal privacy, and other assets will evaporate under the glare of the political spotlight - it's no wonder so many good, upright people won't even consider serving their country as legislators.  What's more, the few good ones who are elected often become disillusioned or burned out, and quit rather than carry on trying to keep their heads above the fetid waters of the swamp.  Those who don't quit, often become part of the problem as they abandon their principles and efforts to find a solution to it.

I begin to think that a constitutional convention might be the only way forward in terms of getting anything done in this country.  Trouble is, that's a two-edged sword.  There are principles like a balanced budget, term limits, and restrictions on the powers of government and their scope (in particular the shameless corrupting of the 'Commerce Clause' that both major parties have aided and abetted for decades) that I'd support in a heartbeat.  Indeed, those principles appear to enjoy widespread support in this country from people of many political persuasions.  However, activists on both sides would doubtless try to hijack the convention for their own purposes, to support or reject their favorite cause du jour.  That would turn the convention into a circus to rival Congress or the Senate.  Why . . . it might even give rise to the suspicion that our elected representatives, whoever and wherever they might be, are actually behaving in the same fractured, schizophrenic, irrational fashion as the people who elected them!  If that's the case, a constitutional convention would be useless.  It would only produce more of the same old, same old . . .

Somehow I envision Washington, Jefferson, Jackson and several other early Presidents looking down from on high at our present mess, shaking their heads, and calling loudly for more beer (or whatever their heavenly tipple might be).  Perhaps strong drink is the only response left to us.




Peter

Interesting news from the USAF

Two interesting bits of news came to my notice over the past few days.  Despite spending billions of dollars on the bloated, overpriced, underperforming F-35 Lightning II program, the US Air Force is still able to devote at least a few dollars to other needs, it seems.

First off, the USAF has invited Brazil's Embraer to bring its EMB 314 Super Tucano counter-insurgency and light attack aircraft (shown below) to what it calls the 'Light Attack Experiment', a weapons and tactics demonstration in New Mexico this August.

It'll be joined by US company Textron's Beechcraft AT-6B, a light attack variant of that company's T-6 Texan II turboprop trainer (based on the Swiss Pilatus PC-9), and also Textron's new Scorpion light attack and reconnaissance jet aircraft, which hasn't yet been sold to any air force, but is attracting interest due to its low price and very low operating costs (compared to those of traditional strike aircraft).  I wouldn't be surprised to see mainstream unmanned aircraft such as the USAF's MQ-9 Reaper and (if inter-service rivalries can be overcome for long enough) the US Army's MQ-1C Gray Eagle take part as well.

The USAF describes the experiment as follows:

“This is an evolution of the close air support experimentation effort which we have now broadened to include a variety of counter-land missions typical of extended operations since Desert Storm,” said Lt. Gen. Arnie Bunch, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition’s military deputy.

. . .

The Air Force will host the live-fly experiment to assess the capabilities of these off-the-shelf attack aircraft. Industry participants will participate with suitable aircraft, which will be flown by Air Force personnel in scenarios designed to highlight aspects of various combat missions, such as close air support, armed reconnaissance, combat search and rescue, and strike control and reconnaissance.

The live-fly experiment also includes the employment of weapons commonly used by other fighter/attack aircraft to demonstrate the capabilities of light attack aircraft for traditional counter-land missions.

“After 25 years of continuous combat operations, our Air Force is in more demand than ever,” said Lt. Gen. Jerry Harris, the deputy chief of staff for strategic plans and requirements. “Since we don’t expect deployment requirements to decrease, we have to look for innovative and affordable ways to meet capability demands in permissive environments while building and maintaining readiness to meet emerging threats in more contested environments.”

The live-fly experimentation will include a number of mission events including medium altitude basic day and night surface attack, precision munition surface attack, armed reconnaissance and close air support.

There's more at the link.

I find this intriguing.  None of these aircraft can approach the A-10 Thunderbolt II in overall close air support capability;  but that aircraft is getting long in the tooth, and will need replacing in the medium term.  The USAF simply can't afford to develop another A-10, given the amount it's spending on the latest and greatest in fast, stealthy jets.  It has to find another approach.  Obviously, for well-defended environments, stealthy and/or fast jets will get the nod for the job, as will UAV's when appropriate;  but for less contested environments, where the aircraft doesn't have to worry about strong anti-air defenses, a light strike aircraft like those mentioned above might get the job done.  It's in the same vein as armed trainers like the T-6 Texan after World War II (which bore the brunt of French close air support duties in Algeria, and Portugal's colonial wars in Africa) and the Cessna A-37 Dragonfly, which was widely used by US allies.

Another report mentioned an aircraft we've met in these pages before, most recently last month:  General Atomics' Avenger jet-powered UAV.  Strategy Page reports:

Meanwhile the air force has apparently settled on an eventual successor for the Predator. This is Avenger, which looks like a larger jet powered version of the Reaper ... The Avenger is designed to fly high (up to 20,000 meters/60,000 feet) and cross oceans. Until 2009 the Avenger didn't officially exist and was a "black" (secret) program. Avenger is, like Reaper, a combat UAV that will often carry weapons as well as sensors. The air force likes the ability to arm Avenger with a smart bomb, including the 900 kg (2,000 pound) GBU-34 penetrator version. Each Avenger costs over $15 million. The Avenger B would probably be a little larger and more expensive. The air force has not yet revealed their wish list of changes for Avenger B. A UAV like Avenger would require the same kind of EW equipment carried by manned warplanes.

Meanwhile all this attention to stealth for Avenger should be no surprise. The Avenger manufacturer, General Atomics, has a division devoted to building stealth features into aircraft. This includes the world's largest indoor radar cross section testing facility. Despite the bomb bay, the Avenger is expected to be used primarily to carry ground surveillance radar, which could be mounted on the bottom of the aircraft in an aerodynamically smooth enclosure.

The U.S. Navy, and several air forces, are also looking at the Avenger as an ELINT (electronic intelligence) aircraft. The ability to carry a ton of sensors and stay in the air for twenty hours per sortie has a lot of appeal for an aircraft that is already stealthy and doesn't carry a pilot. Moreover, the Avenger can perform ELINT missions entirely autonomously, making it more difficult to detect.

Again, more at the link.

This fits in with my earlier speculation, and answers a number of intriguing questions.  If the USAF's drone fleet moves to the much faster, much higher-flying Avenger, it's less likely to be used for close air support (although that remains a useful mission for it, particularly if it can drop 'smart' bombs at standoff ranges that keep it out of sight of enemies - its arrival would be announced only by the explosion of its weapons).  If light strike aircraft can take on some of the duties currently fulfilled, in part, by the earlier Predator and Reaper drones, the Avenger will be freed to take on the demands of future combat in a less permissive air environment.  Its stealth characteristics will help it to survive in places where the older, slower models would be shot out of the sky.

All this looks very interesting for the future of the USAF.  I still think the F-35 program needs to be euthanized as quickly as possible, but that's so politically ring-fenced it's unlikely to happen.  (I suspect sheer economic pressure will eventually win out;  the F-35 is simply unaffordable in the numbers the USAF wants.)  These lower-cost options may take some of the budgetary pressure off the USAF and our allies, and open up new opportunities to get some of the service's tasks done at a more affordable cost.

Peter

Fiddling while Rome burns?

More and more, I'm seeing a major disconnect between economic reality on the ground, and the behavior of our politicians and investors (who are inextricably linked in our 'political class').  I think it's a disconnect between people and things.  Let me explain.

Most investors today are not investing in people.  They're investing in securities, or stocks, or bonds, or debentures, or other financial instruments.  The price of those things is what occupies their minds;  the actual people behind them - the individuals who produce and distribute and buy the goods made by the companies whose stocks they trade, the individuals who open and operate and close accounts at the banks in which they invest, the individuals who earn their daily bread by working for the companies whose shares they buy - never really enter their thoughts.

However, those people are critically important.  Their habits shape and form companies.  To take just two examples from today's headlines:

• Brick-and-mortar retailers are having a terrible time, economically speaking, as consumer shopping habits change.  Business Insider claims that 'The retail apocalypse has officially descended on America', and forecasts closure of over 3,500 major retail stores in 2017.  In contrast, Amazon.com (which dominates online consumer purchasing in the USA) is doing well, and other retailers are racing to catch up.
• The auto industry, beneficiary of a controversial and (in my opinion) unnecessary bailout during the 2007/08 financial crisis, is struggling once more.  US vehicle sales are dropping;  Ford has just announced it will shed 10% of its global workforce;  General Motors currently has approximately 100 days' inventory of vehicles in stock, tying up immense amounts of money that it can't use to generate more revenue;  and used car prices are expected to fall dramatically, putting further downward pressure on bloated new car prices.

The thing is, those negative headlines aren't just about companies and their products.  They're about the people who produce those products, who are about to get hit with layoffs (and probably reduced earnings for those that don't lose their jobs);  and they're about the people who buy those products (who are, of course, the same as those who make them - and with many more of them out of work, there are fewer consumers able to buy.  What's more, given stagnant purchasing power in real terms over the past several decades, many consumers are tapped out in terms of their financial resources.  They're already using all the credit available to them, and can't qualify for more - so their purchasing power is being cut.)  Given that consumer spending 'accounts for approximately 70 percent of all [US] economic growth', any stagnation or reduction in the latter must inevitably affect our entire economy - and those who invest in it.  (The same problem is evident in other First World economies, too;  to cite just one example, see this Canadian article.)

Yet, while all this turmoil is affecting consumers and their economic outlook, the 'investor class' continues to make hay while the sun shines, ignoring the grim economic realities that (fail to) underpin their financial castles in the air.  Take, for example, this snippet:

It was an odd transaction from the outset: $14 million, double the going rate, for a 31-acre plot of flat, undeveloped land just west of Chicago. In the nine months since, the curious use of the space has only added to the intrigue. A single, nondescript pole with two antennas was erected by a row of shrubs. Some supporting equipment was rolled in. That’s it.

But those aren’t ordinary antennas. And the buyer of the property isn’t your typical land investor. It’s an affiliate of a company called Jump Trading LLC, a legendary and secretive trading firm that’s a major player in some of the most important financial markets. Just across the street, it turns out, lies the data center for CME Group Inc., the world’s biggest futures exchange. By placing its antennas so close to CME’s servers, Jump may be trying to shave maybe a microsecond -- one-millionth of a second -- off its reaction time, potentially enough to separate a winning from a losing bid in trading that takes place at almost the speed of light.

It’s the latest, and perhaps boldest, salvo in an escalating war that’s being waged to stay competitive in the high-speed trading business. The war is one of proximity -- to see who can get data in and out of CME the quickest ... “It tells you how valuable being just a little bit faster is,” said Michael Goldstein, a finance professor at Babson College in Babson Park, Massachusetts. “People say seconds matter. This is microseconds matter.”

There's more at the link.

The article illustrates a financial ecosystem that ignores people, or 'boots on the ground', or 'brick-and-mortar stores', or any of the traditional measures of an economy.  Instead, it measures success in terms of microseconds, computers guided by artificial intelligence systems and a few experts making trading decisions on stocks and bonds so fast, and responding so quickly to one another, that small investors like you and I have virtually no chance of duplicating their successes.  If you hold shares in an IRA, or 401(k), or mutual funds, you're basically irrelevant to the stock market as a whole.  You and I simply don't count in these terms.  A few players make millions . . . the rest of us just sit on the sidelines, hoping to catch some of the crumbs as they fall from the players' tables.  The same applies to many smaller companies, investing their pension funds in stocks and bonds.  Unless they pay exorbitant fees to companies offering such high-performance trading services, it's as if they're driving a horse and buggy around the Brickyard, being lapped every few seconds by those in more modern racing cars.  We, as individuals, are in the same unenviable situation, as Gordon Gekko illustrates.

That scene was filmed 30 years ago, but its implications are as real today as they were then.  Small fry like us don't count to the 'investor class'.

And yet . . . and yet . . . we do count.  Because if we stop buying . . . if we don't have any resources left to spend, and therefore stop consuming . . . all those factories, all over the world, that produce goods for us, suddenly have no market.  All those transport companies, all those planes and ships and trucks, transporting goods from factories to stores . . . they no longer have anything to move.  All those retailers, whether brick-and-mortar or online, making money by selling us what we need . . . they have no customers.  And when that happens, what's the worth of all those stocks and bonds and financial instruments?  Zero.  A big fat zero . . . because they're all underpinned by our spending habits, and when those change or go away, the financial markets are left with no foundation at all.

That, ironically, is the problem.  You see, our politicians and financiers know that their prosperity is dependent on us going along with the present system.  Therefore, they do everything in their power to make us go along.  They 'deficit spend', running the country on loans and bonds, until the US national debt is all but out of control.  They pass laws making it easier for us to borrow, and borrow, and borrow, until we're up to our ears in debt with no practical way out of it.  In the worst case, as in the bank rescues of 2007/08, the government even buys up private debt in order to assist the banks.  That's what the Federal Reserve did when it bought trillions of dollars' worth of mortgage backed securities.  That lowered interest rates, which made mortgages more affordable to private citizens like you and I - but saddled all US taxpayers with the ultimate responsibility for those debts, because the US government bought most of our mortgages.  If we stop paying, US taxpayers are on the hook for the money.

Despite the change of administration in Washington D.C., the same old game is still being played out.  The politicians and investors are still running things to suit themselves, trusting that they'll be able to manage consumers like us into doing what's good for them, rather than what's good for us.

The only way to change that is for us to start putting our own interests first.  That means refusing to take on more debt than we can afford;  paying off existing debt as quickly as we can;  living according to our means, rather than our desires;  paying cash for any essential purchases, or buying them on a credit card that we pay off in full at the end of every month, rather than putting off payment into the future.  All these are financially prudent steps for our economic well-being . . . but all of them are anathema to an economy that depends on us becoming debt slaves, and remaining debt slaves for the rest of our lives.

I remain confident that our economy, nationally and globally, is riding for a fall in the long term.  Levels of indebtedness - corporate, government and private - are now so incredibly vast that there's no historical parallel for them at all.  I believe that sooner or later, the chickens must inevitably come home to roost, and when they do, hard times will be here for all of us.  I strongly suggest that we all plan and act accordingly.

(As an example, I've been working on getting our household to a point where we have enough food reserves to keep us going for two to three months.  We're just about there now.  We won't do more than that - we can't afford it, and we don't have enough space to store more food - but at least, if things get very bad for a while, we'll have that reserve on which to draw.  We may be able to buy only enough food for one meal a day, but if we can eat another out of our reserves, we won't go hungry.  I know more than a few people who've literally eaten into their reserve supplies during economic hard times over the past few years.  They're all grateful that they bothered to make preparations in the first place, and do so even more enthusiastically now!)

Peter

Can anyone provide more details of this shooting?

An attack late at night in a seemingly peaceful suburb . . . a home-owner who deploys an AR-15 rifle to deadly effect, shooting fast and accurately . . . I wonder what the backstory was?  I can't imagine those drive-by shooters chose the house at random, and I certainly can't imagine that the home-owner was standing by ready for combat with a fully loaded AR-15, just in case!

Was this a case of mistaken identity?  A drug deal gone bad?  A feud between gangs, or between gang members?  If you can provide more information, please do so in Comments.

Thanks.

Peter

Doofus Of The Day #958

Today's award goes to an over-credulous (and late) pastor in Zimbabwe.

A pastor has been killed after he was eaten by three crocodiles while trying to walk on water, it has been claimed.

Jonathan Mthethwa was trying to show his congregation how Jesus walked on water by crossing what is locally known as Crocodile River on foot, according to local reports.

. . .

‘All that was left of him when they finished eating him is a pair of sandals and his underwear floating above the water.’

There's more at the link.

Y'know, Jesus walked across the Sea of Galilee.  I daresay even he might have thought twice about trying it on the Crocodile River!  He might have sent Daniel, though - he made it through a night in a lion's den, so crocodiles probably wouldn't have fazed him . . .




Peter

EDITED TO ADD:  It seems the report was false.  Pity . . . it made a good Doofus Of The Day entry!

Give a bureaucrat an inch . . .

. . . and he'll take a yard - and he won't give it back, either.  Two news items caught my eye this morning to confirm that.

First, on a smaller scale, courtesy of a link at Joel's place, we learn of a town council that seems to have arrogated to itself far too much power.  Bold, underlined text is my emphasis.

The city [of Columbiana] is not out to take away your freedom. To think so is “ridiculous,” according to Mayor Bryan Blakeman.

Blakeman made the statement during last week’s council meeting in response to a Facebook post by resident Tony Dolan which indicated that legislation pertaining to gardens is another step by the city to encroach on personal freedom.

“It has been frighteningly apparent that we in this city have given our freedoms up in ways that we never really saw coming,” Dolan wrote in the Columbiana for/against Chickens Facebook page.

. . .

The city had no laws pertaining to residential gardens, which means they were technically not allowed.

According to the city’s laws, if something is not permitted it is prohibited.

“Right now, if there is not something expressly in this code that says that you can have one, you technically can’t,” Blakeman confirmed.

There's more at the link.

Just who the hell do those councillors think they are?  That report makes them sound like Big Brother in Orwell's 'Nineteen Eighty-Four'!  And how the heck did the citizens of Columbiana allow themselves to be dragooned in that way?  Were they asleep at the wheel when it came to voting in their councillors?  One hopes they'll read that report, realize the depths of their predicament, and vote in a new town council, one that will undo the damage before it's too late.

The second report is on a much broader, even global scale - but it could (and probably will) affect all of us.  Pew Research Center undertook a large-scale survey titled 'The Future of Free Speech, Trolls, Anonymity and Fake News Online'.  Once again, bold, underlined text is my emphasis.

Anonymity, a key affordance of the early internet, is an element that many in this canvassing attributed to enabling bad behavior and facilitating “uncivil discourse” in shared online spaces. The purging of user anonymity is seen as possibly leading to a more inclusive online environment and also setting the stage for governments and dominant institutions to even more freely employ surveillance tools to monitor citizens, suppress free speech and shape social debate.

. . .

Those who believe the problems of trolling and other toxic behaviors can be solved say the cure might also be quite damaging. “One of the biggest challenges will be finding an appropriate balance between protecting anonymity and enforcing consequences for the abusive behavior that has been allowed to characterize online discussions for far too long,” explained expert respondent Bailey Poland, author of “Haters: Harassment, Abuse, and Violence Online.”

The majority in this canvassing were sympathetic to those abused or misled in the current online environment while expressing concerns that the most likely solutions will allow governments and big businesses to employ surveillance systems that monitor citizens, suppress free speech and shape discourse via algorithms, allowing those who write the algorithms to sculpt civil debate.

Again, more at the link.

That's the problem with trusting, or allowing, governments to shape and control the exchange of information.  They love the idea.  They're staffed by bureaucrats and power-hungry politicians, so 'control' is in their genetic make-up, as it were.  They aren't interested in individual rights and liberties, except for controlling them.

President Gerald Ford famously warned:  "A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."  If we look to government to solve the problem of online trolling and bad behavior, we should not be surprised if (when) that government seizes the reins of the online environment and refuses to let go.  Further, we should not be surprised if (when) that government solves the problem to its satisfaction, rather than ours.  After all, who's in charge here?  Certainly not us!

More and more, in every area of life, we need to vigilantly defend, safeguard and be aware of threats against our freedom, privacy and discourse.  If we let them go by default, history shows us that we're unlikely to get them back again without a fight . . . so, rather than do that, with all the cost and effort it involves, why not hold onto them firmly in the first place?

Peter

Sunday morning music

I've mentioned Strawbs in these pages on more than one occasion.  They were (and still are, in semi-retirement) a British folk- and progressive-rock group that made a deep impact in their native country in the late 1960's and 1970's.  They broke new ground in many ways, and influenced those who came after them.  I've been a fan of their music since my youth.

Dave Cousins wrote most of their songs, many of them undoubtedly under the influence of the drugs that were popular at the time, others inspired by esoteric spiritualities such as the I Ching.  I was (and remain) uncomfortable with some of them, due to my own Christian faith;  but others I found very profound, more poetry set to music than songs in the traditional pop and rock form.  I've chosen several of the latter to share with you this morning, songs that I think reflect Cousins' own searching for truth and the poetry inside him.  I'll play them in chronological order.

First, from the band's eponymous debut album in 1969, here's a folk rock piece called 'The Battle'.  This performance is from a live concert later that year, published as the album 'Recollection'.  Keyboards are played by a very young Rick Wakeman.  It's uncomfortable listening for Christians, but it's also a very real reflection of the damage caused to our society by warring interpretations of faith.  This song became something of an anthem for those trying to bring about peace in Northern Ireland, where the Troubles pitted Catholic against Protestant for decades.

Next, one of the group's greatest hits, 'Hero and Heroine', from the 1974 album of the same name.  This is pure hard progressive rock, all the way - yet also poetry.

To show the impact of the I Ching on Cousins' composition, here are a couple of songs that he's acknowledged were directly influenced by it.  First, from the album 'Grave New World' in 1972, here's the very well-known 'Benedictus'.

A more meditative and seldom-heard song, from a 2012 remastered re-release of 'Hero and Heroine', is 'Still Small Voice', which also shows the influence of the I Ching.

From their 1975 album 'Nomadness', here's 'So Shall Our Love Die?'  At the time, Cousins was going through a very rocky patch in his second marriage, which was to end in divorce.  He implicitly acknowledged in his autobiography, 'Exorcising Ghosts: Strawbs & Other Lives', that most of the fault was his own.

Finally, from their 1977 album 'Burning For You', here's the almost-eponymous title track, 'Burning For Me'.

There are so many good songs from the Strawbs that it was hard to limit myself to just six.  Nevertheless, I hope you enjoyed them;  and, if you hadn't paid much attention to Strawbs before, I suggest you give more of their music a try.  It repays careful listening.

Peter

For those who like (?) recoil

A tip o' the hat to Wirecutter for finding this one.

You couldn't pay me enough to fire that gun with that load . . . I can feel carpal tunnel syndrome coming on just at the thought!




Peter

For lovers of grilled cheese sandwiches

The New York Post has a great survey of the best grilled cheese sandwiches around the country.  The descriptions include some mouth-watering recipe ideas to try at home.

For example, here's the 'Madtown Grilled Cheese' sandwich from the Hopcat in Detroit, MI, described on their menu as:  'A trio of Wisconsin dill Havarti, smoked Gouda & Muenster on grilled Italian sourdough with apple slices, garlic aioli & honey'.  I've got to try making that sometime!

For a Midwest variation, try the Hopleaf Bar in Chicago with its Toasted Nueske Ham sandwich, which the Post describes as 'served on pumpernickel with the titular lunch meat plus nutty gruyere cheese and a tangy apple-tarragon slaw'.

Dammit, it's not even light outside yet, and my mouth's already watering!  The article describes no less than 20 sandwiches, so I can see I've got lots of recipes to try over the next few months.

Peter

ISIS and US progressives - what's the difference?

Vox points out:

As he says:  "What, precisely, is the difference? There is no difference. It's just vandalizing history of which one does not approve."

Methinks he has a point.




Peter

Should that be "Groooaaann!" or "Ribbit!"?

Seen on Gab:

Peter

If you're following me on Gab . . .

. . . the new social medium that I mentioned a couple of days ago, please let me know here (or there) so that I can follow you in turn.  Several of you have mentioned that you're doing that, but since I don't know your user names over there, I can't return the favor.  Leave a comment here, or post a message to me there @PeterG, to let me know.

Thanks!

Peter

Never let a knife-wielding attacker get within range!

In general, if you have to use violence to defend yourself, you may have to justify that in court.  If you use potentially or actually lethal force, the chances of having to justify it in court go up exponentially.

One of your primary defenses will be how you were trained, what you learned during your education process, and how your defensive mindset was formed.  As part of that, it helps to document your training through class notes (taking them yourself if necessary), video clips of the instructor (often found on YouTube), recordings, etc.  You can also introduce as evidence material from others that reinforces and supports your defensive mindset.

I'd like to show you one such piece of material this morning, particularly because Antifa, the progressive far-left-wing movement behind much of the anti-Trump and anti-conservative unrest of recent months, was advertising credit-card-sized concealed knives on its Web site.  These things may be tiny, relatively speaking, but they can do an awful lot of damage - potentially disabling damage, if not inflicting permanent injury such as the loss of an eye or a severed nerve - in the hands of someone who knows how to use one.  The odds are increasing that people like us may run into one of these demonstrations - so it behooves us to be prepared to counter such violence, in defense of ourselves and our loved ones.

Here's what even a very small knife can do to a human being.  I recommend watching the video in full-screen mode.

Remember that video.  Bookmark it and/or save a copy for future reference.  Remember Antifa's attempts to sell knives of similar size to its members, and their open discussion about the need to arm and train themselves.  Remember it if you run into them while about your lawful business . . . and keep them out of knife range, by whatever means may be necessary (and, of course, legal - that goes without saying).  If you ever have to justify that decision and/or your actions, play back that video in court, point out Antifa's discussions and its efforts to sell knives to its members, and make it clear that you considered yourself in imminent danger of suffering similar injuries unless you stopped them.  It's a compelling argument.

Peter

Religion as virtual reality?

That's how one observer sees it - and he believes it has implications for the future of humanity in a technological future without work for many of us.

The crucial problem isn’t creating new jobs. The crucial problem is creating new jobs that humans perform better than algorithms. Consequently, by 2050 a new class of people might emerge – the useless class. People who are not just unemployed, but unemployable.

. . .

People must engage in purposeful activities, or they go crazy. So what will the useless class do all day?

One answer might be computer games. Economically redundant people might spend increasing amounts of time within 3D virtual reality worlds, which would provide them with far more excitement and emotional engagement than the “real world” outside. This, in fact, is a very old solution. For thousands of years, billions of people have found meaning in playing virtual reality games. In the past, we have called these virtual reality games “religions”.

What is a religion if not a big virtual reality game played by millions of people together? Religions like Islam and Christianity invent imaginary laws, such as “don’t eat pork”, “repeat the same prayers a set number of times each day”, “don’t have sex with somebody from your own gender”, and so forth. These laws exist only in the human imagination. No natural law requires the repetition of magical formulas and no natural law forbids homosexuality or eating pork. Muslims and Christians go through life trying to gain points in their favorite virtual reality game. If you pray every day, you get points. If you forget to pray, you lose points. If by the end of your life you gain enough points, then after you die you go to the next level of the game (aka Heaven).

As religions show us, the virtual reality need not be encased inside an isolated box. Rather, it can be superimposed on the physical reality. In the past this was done with the human imagination and with sacred books, and in the 21st century it can be done with smartphones.

Some time ago I went with my six-year-old nephew Matan to hunt for Pokémon. As we walked down the street, Matan kept looking at his smartphone, which enabled him to spot Pokémon all around us. I didn’t see any Pokémon at all, because I didn’t carry a smartphone. Then we saw two others kids on the street who were hunting the same Pokémon, and we almost got into a fight with them. It struck me how similar the situation was to the conflict between Jews and Muslims about the holy city of Jerusalem. When you look at the objective reality of Jerusalem, all you see are stones and buildings. There is no holiness anywhere. But when you look through the medium of smartbooks (such as the Bible and Qur’an), you see holy places and angels everywhere.

. . .

Do we really want to live in a world in which billions of people are immersed in fantasies, pursuing make-believe goals and obeying imaginary laws? Well, like it or not, that’s the world we have been living in for thousands of years already. 

There's more at the link.  The author goes into much more detail in his new book, 'Homo Deus:  A Brief History of Tomorrow'.

Of course, the biggest obstacle to accepting this 'religion-as-virtual-reality' view of humanity is that it begins with the understanding that religion is factually false;  that there is no God except one of our own invention, and no eternity outside this life.  In other words, since we have 'made' (i.e. invented) God in our own image, we can proceed to remake ourselves in our own made-up vision of what we are and should become.

That's the sticking point for people of faith, right there.  It's our contention - whether we're Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or any one of many other faiths - that we are made in the image and likeness of God, rather than the other way around.  We believe that we were created by God, not that we have created a fantasy God in our own minds.  If people of faith are right, that means any attempt to remake humanity by inventing a computer-game simulation that we 'play' in order to give meaning to our lives, must inevitably fail, because it doesn't take the reality of creation into account.  As St. Paul put it from a Christian perspective:

And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty.  Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise.  For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen.  And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!  Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.  If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

That's the nub of the problem.  If a secular scientist, or a secular government, seeks to remake human society in the image of what people of faith will inevitably regard as a 'false god' - secular humanism - then their efforts are certain to meet resistance.  In the final analysis, to treat religion as if it were nothing more than a fantasy is to tell people of faith that they have been deceived, and that those propagating their faith are liars, and that their hope is in vain.  I, for one, will never accept that, and I know many other people of faith who will respond likewise.

It's a dilemma and a conundrum . . . and it's going to become a real problem for those of us who live long enough, and for our descendants and successors in faith.  We're living in, not just a post-Christian, but a post-religious society.  What will it become in future?  Into what will it evolve?  What will become of people of faith - people like us?  Will society have any room for us at all?

Peter