Notes on how things seem to me from out here in Hollywood... As seen from Just Above Sunset
OF INTEREST
Click here to go there... Click here to go there...

Here you will find a few things you might want to investigate.

Support the Just Above Sunset websites...

Sponsor:

Click here to go there...

ARCHIVE
« February 2004 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29
Photos and text, unless otherwise noted, Copyright © 2003,2004,2005,2006 - Alan M. Pavlik
Contact the Editor

Consider:

"It is better to be drunk with loss and to beat the ground, than to let the deeper things gradually escape."

- I. Compton-Burnett, letter to Francis King (1969)

"Cynical realism – it is the intelligent man’s best excuse for doing nothing in an intolerable situation."

- Aldous Huxley, "Time Must Have a Stop"







Site Meter
Technorati Profile

Friday, 20 February 2004

Topic: The Economy

Fixing the job situation in an otherwise booming economy...

This is curious.

See In the New Economics: Fast-Food Factories?
David Cay Johnston, The New York Times, February 20, 2004

Here's the concept:
Is cooking a hamburger patty and inserting the meat, lettuce and ketchup inside a bun a manufacturing job, like assembling automobiles?

That question is posed in the new Economic Report of the President, a thick annual compendium of observations and statistics on the health of the United States economy.

The latest edition, sent to Congress last week, questions whether fast-food restaurants should continue to be counted as part of the service sector or should be reclassified as manufacturers. No answers were offered.

In a speech to Washington economists Tuesday, N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, said that properly classifying such workers was "an important consideration" in setting economic policy.

... "When a fast-food restaurant sells a hamburger, for example, is it providing a 'service' or is it combining inputs to 'manufacture' a product?" the report asks.

"Sometimes, seemingly subtle differences can determine whether an industry is classified as manufacturing. For example, mixing water and concentrate to produce soft drinks is classified as manufacturing. However, if that activity is performed at a snack bar, it is considered a service."

... David Huether, chief economist for the National Association of Manufacturers, said he had heard that some economists wanted to count hamburger flipping as manufacturing, which he noted would produce statistics showing more jobs in what has been a declining sector of the economy.
Indeed, it would produce such statistics.

I myself have managed the system shop at a General Motors factory where they pumped out locomotives and light armored vehicles - using complex mainframe MRP (manufacturing resource planning) systems. We had four to six programmer-analysts keeping that creaky old MRP system running. Sean led a team to design a warehouse pick-list system to get parts to the assembly line on time. Steph and Tim were working on accounting systems, while Rhona was a key DBA (database administrator) keeping things in order on the mid-range Unix boxes tracking all sorts of things. Then there was linking to the big mainframe in Plano to track ten of thousands of parts for NAFTA certification so the finished products could cross borders with minimal tariffs.

Just like MacDonald's and Burger King? Maybe. Maybe not.

But if you want to improve unemployment statistics in regard to manufacturing, this could work. Perhaps I should trot my r?sum? down to the local In-and-Out Burger place on Sunset. My experience could be of use to them?

It strikes me that one reason the economy is booming, with profits soaring and the market rising, and productivity jumping better than it is has in forty or fifty years, is precisely because there may be almost ten million folks out of work. This depresses wages, keeping them quite low - what with everyone worried about being laid off or having their job outsourced to Lahore or Bombay. Pressing for better wages or better benefits would be insane, and collective labor actions foolish. You don't want to roll those dice.

Profits thus rise when labor costs are decreasing dramatically. The current situation keeps workers "in line" and benefits owners and investors. No kidding.

The problem for the current administration is that not just investors and owners vote. Workers vote too. The trick will be convincing these workers that they are in great shape manufacturing useful things for their fellow countrymen.

Well, burgers are useful.

Posted by Alan at 08:26 PST | Post Comment | Permalink
home

Thursday, 19 February 2004

Topic: The Culture

DEEP THOUGHTS (sort of) - and an odd questionnaire...
Terry Teachout lives in Manhattan. He's the drama critic of the Wall Street Journal and the music critic of Commentary - and you find the most interesting things on his site About Last Night - like this:

The source is an essay called "Morality and Literature," first published in Cahiers du Sud (January 1944). However, the following quotation, tracked down by one intrepid reader, seems to vindicate my memory without contradicting the above. Here Weil claims that the greatest literature is that which manages to make good interesting, and thus comes closest to a particular kind of realism:
Imaginary evil is romantic and varied; real evil is gloomy, monotonous, barren, boring. Imaginary good is boring; real good is always new, marvelous, intoxicating. Therefore 'imaginative literature' is either boring or immoral (or a mixture of both). It only escapes from this alternative if in some way it passes over to the side of reality through the power of art - and only geniuses can do that.
This can be found in an essay called "Evil," reprinted in The Simone Weil Reader and Gravity and Grace.

Imaginary evil is romantic and varied; real evil is gloomy, monotonous, barren, boring?

I'd like examples to prove this. I once spent an afternoon at the Pentagon chatting with people in the office of one of the assistant secretaries of defense, and met Frank Carlucci. That may be a good example. Now? A day in the White House, perhaps?

_______________

Then I came across these questions which I found puzzling....
(1) What book have you owned longest - the actual copy, I mean?
(2) If you could wish a famous painting out of existence, what would it be?
(3) If you had to live in a film, what would it be?
(4) If you had to live in a song, what would it be?
(5) What's the saddest work of art you know? And does experiencing it make you similarly sad?
How to answer these?

(1) A translation of Camus' l'?tranger from back when I was in early high school, or Alan Watt's The Way of Zen - both handed me by my crazy uncle. I think he must have meant me harm. But I see I still have Brooks' and Warren's Understanding Poetry from those high school days (sort of in tatters now) - and that's a book which led me to fall in with the "new criticism" which led to semiotics and deconstructionist ideas and other evils.

(2) Keep every one of the Monet haystacks, I suppose. Oh hell, keep them all. Even the dogs playing poker.

(3) Which film? Not Alphaville or Fast Times at Ridgemont High either. If I lived in a film The Music Man wouldn't do - although listing to the Buffalo Bills (the barbershop singers, not the football guys) do "Lida Rose" always makes me feel good. I guess I'd settle for An American in Paris, or maybe Casablanca - where I'd be one of the guys in the white tuxes in the band, I suppose.

(4) How can one live in a song? Would it be the Beach Boys' Good Vibrations or something else? I always got a kick out the chord changes in Dizzy Gillespie's A Night in Tunisia and could play it for hours. The weepy old torch song Long Ago and Far Away might do. But I'll settle for Charles Trenet's La Mer - which always makes me smile.

(5) The saddest work of art I know? Pick any of the surreal stories by Donald Barthelme - "The best way to live is by not knowing what will happen to you at the end of the day..." But there is that e-minor prelude of Chopin - which I used to actually be able to play. Do such things make you similarly sad? Not really. Just thoughtful, or something like it.

Your turn for these questions....

Posted by Alan at 20:18 PST | Post Comment | Permalink
Updated: Thursday, 19 February 2004 20:54 PST home


Topic: For policy wonks...

Musical Chairs - Colin Powell loses...

I was at West Point in June 1990 for my nephew's graduation and the commencement speaker was Colin Powell. The president had spoken the previous year and the tradition was that it was to be, that year, the vice president. But I suspect someone thought the idea of Dan Quayle inspiring these new young officers was a little implausible. So they sent the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - and that is about as high up in the military as one can go. Colin Powell wasn't even a West Point guy. He came up through ROTC, curiously. And the speech was fine.

Now he is our secretary of state and has been, shall we say, effectively neutered and rendered mostly harmless - and certainly insignificant.

How did this happen?

Fred Kaplan offers an analysis today in Slate that is pretty good.

See The Tragedy of Colin Powell: How the Bush presidency destroyed him
Fred Kaplan, SLATE.COM, Posted Thursday, Feb. 19, 2004, at 9:56 AM PT

Kaplan recounts Powell getting testy last week in a senate hearing when an aide started smiling and shaking his head at something Powell said - and Powell reprimanded him.

Kaplan's view? Colin Powell melting down.
Here is a man who faced hardships in the Bronx as a kid, bullets in Vietnam as a soldier, and bureaucratic bullets through four administrations in Washington, a man who rose to the ranks of Army general, national security adviser, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and secretary of state, a man who thought seriously about running for president - and he gets bent out of shape by some snarky House staffer?

Powell's outburst is a textbook sign of overwhelming stress. Maybe he was just having a bad day. Then again, he's also been having a bad three years.
Well, that is what happened.

But Kaplan says we should consider the circumstances:
As George Bush's first term nears its end, Powell's tenure as top diplomat is approaching its nadir. On the high-profile issues of the day, he seems to have almost no influence within the administration. And his fateful briefing one year ago before the U.N. Security Council - where he attached his personal credibility to claims of Iraqi WMD - has destroyed his once-considerable standing with the Democrats, not to mention our European allies, most of the United Nations, and the media.

... Powell must be frustrated beyond measure. One can imagine the scoldings he takes from liberal friends for playing "good soldier" in an administration that's treated him so shabbily and that's rejected his advice so brazenly. That senseless dressing-down of the committee staffer - a tantrum that no one with real power would ever indulge in - can best be seen as a rare public venting of Powell's maddened mood.
Kaplan says this is all "a tragic tale of politics: so much ambition derailed, so much accomplishment nullified."

Perhaps so.

The story?
From the start of this presidency, and to a degree that no one would have predicted when he stepped into Foggy Bottom with so much pride and energy, Powell has found himself almost consistently muzzled, outflanked, and humiliated by the true powers - Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. (Bureaucratic battles between Foggy Bottom and the Pentagon have been a feature of many presidencies, but Powell has suffered the additional - and nearly unprecedented - indignity of swatting off continuous rear-guard assaults from his own undersecretary of state, John Bolton, an aggressive hard-liner who was installed at State by Cheney - for the purpose of diverting and exhausting the multilateralists.)

One of Powell's first acts as secretary of state was to tell a reporter that the Bush administration would pick up where Bill Clinton left off in negotiations with North Korea--only to be told by Cheney that it would do no such thing. He had to retract his statement. For the next nine months, he disappeared so definitively that Time magazine asked, on its cover of Sept. 10, 2001, "Where Is Colin Powell?"
Indeed.

Well he won one over Cheney and Rumsfeld when he finally got Bush to go to the UN for some sort of vote on the war - as if that mattered. And of course Powell's objections to Ariel Sharon's departure from the Israeli-Palestinian "road map" were overridden by a White House where Eliot Abrams had been put in charge of Middle East policy. When Bush had to send someone there to calm the folks there down he sent Condoleezza Rice - to show he was serious. Powell wouldn't do. Fix the problem with all the debt Iraq had accumulated over the years. Send Powell? No. Use the family friend, James Baker.

Kaplan does point out one interesting win:
Last September, Powell met with President Bush in the Oval Office to make the case for presenting a new UN resolution on the occupation of Iraq - and to announce that the Joint Chiefs agreed with him. This was a daring move: Rumsfeld opposed going back to the United Nations; Powell, the retired general, had gone around him for support.
Yeah, but it didn't work. We got no help there.

North Korea? Kaplan reminds us Powell said we'd continue the Clinton idea supported by the South Korean government - talk this nuclear-weapons program out. Cheney and Rumsfeld opposed even sitting down for talks. Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld shut him down and he took it back - Powell said he really didn't mean it. But curiously, now we're talking a bit.

And yes a few weeks ago David Kay proclaimed that Iraq probably didn't have weapons of mass destruction after all - so Powell told a reporter that he might not have favored going to war if he'd known there were no WMD a year ago. He almost instantly retracted his words. Bad boy! Now roll over and play dead.

The man is out, any way he turns. The Republican Bush administration neutered him and the Democrats know him as a shill for the neoconservative maniacs who want us to abandon girly diplomacy altogether for manly war and silence. Real men don't talk. They act.

Think of that musical chairs game. Fifteen people and fourteen chairs. The music ended. Everyone found a place to sit down, and he didn't. So it goes.

Kaplan says Powell's best option, after January, may be to abandon his ambitions for further public office, nab a lucrative job in the private sector, and write the most outrageous kiss-and-tell political memoir that the world has ever seen.

Like after the Suskind book we need another?

Posted by Alan at 17:44 PST | Post Comment | Permalink
home


Topic: Science

Not that it matters.

Note the following, all over the web for the last two days.

Blinded by Science

"You would think that hopelessly destablilizing two large Muslim nations and saddling the American economy with debts into the 22nd century would be enough destruction for one administration - but that would be to "misunderestimate" the Shrubster's band of merry thiefs. A group of more than 60 top U.S. scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates and several science advisers to past Republican presidents, yesterday accused the Bush administration of manipulating and censoring science for political purposes. What do you expect from a government in which the President and the Secretary of Education both believe evolution is a theory and creationism is a science?"

The problems the report alludes to?

The report charges that administration officials have:

- Ordered massive changes to a section on global warming in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2003 Report on the Environment. Eventually, the entire section was dropped.

- Replaced a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention fact sheet on proper condom use with a warning emphasizing condom failure rates.

- Ignored advice from top Department of Energy nuclear materials experts who cautioned that aluminum tubes being imported by Iraq weren't suitable for use to make nuclear weapons.

- Established political litmus tests for scientific advisory boards. In one case, public health experts were removed from a CDC lead paint advisory panel and replaced with researchers who had financial ties to the lead industry.

- Suppressed a U.S. Department of Agriculture microbiologist's finding that potentially harmful bacteria float in the air surrounding large hog farms.

- Excluded scientists who've received federal grants from regulatory advisory panels while permitting the appointment of scientists from regulated industries.

"I don't recall it ever being so blatant in the past," said Princeton University physicist Val Fitch, a 1980 Nobel Prize winner who served on a Nixon administration science advisory committee. "It's just time after time after time. The facts have been distorted."

But what are facts? Science is overrated? I guess the administration believes in taking "the moral high ground" in these matters.

Posted by Alan at 10:17 PST | Post Comment | Permalink
Updated: Thursday, 19 February 2004 20:48 PST home


Topic: World View

Highly Recommend!

In the left column you'll see a new link to a new blog. This is Louisa Chu's Food. France. Now.

The blog explains itself. Louisa is in Paris, at the center of the gastronomical world, so to speak. And these are insider details.

I have known Louisa for a few years and we trade emails about food and Paris now and then. I haven't seen her years, but you can hear her sometimes out here, reporting from Paris for the weekend "Food News Hour" on the radio out here - on KCRW.

Oddly enough in mid-December a few years ago I arrived at my hotel in Paris after many, many hours in the air non-stop from LAX, and after a crazy taxi ride from CDG into the 6th with a surly driver and his friendly dog in the front seat, I took a quick shower and headed across the street for a cognac at the Flore. And of course I discovered my French was awfully rusty - well, awful actually. So when I returned to my room I flipped on the television. "Friends" dubbed in French helped a bit with the rhythms and pronunciations, and then on Arte I watched a documentary on the most unique radio station in America - KCRW in Santa Monica. Huh? I was in Paris listening to the French, in French, explaining my local NPR station.

But then again these days I can hear Louisa here, reporting from Paris, thanks to the folks in Santa Monica.

Odd connections.... Here and Paris. And of course, on that visit I noticed the cinema just off rue St-Benoit was showing "Mulholland Drive" - I could see marquee from my hotel window. Damned odd. Just up rue des Rennes I found I junk jewelry store named "Sunset Boulevard." Yipes.

Oh heck, read Louisa's columns. Great stuff.

Posted by Alan at 09:13 PST | Post Comment | Permalink
home

Newer | Latest | Older