Issue 155 Egypt Lost September 3, 2013

The country of Egypt is on fire. Due to CIA meddling under (possibly) the Bush Administration and under the Obama Administration, the country's leader was overthrown in a somewhat peaceful transition to a democratic government. However, that was not to last as the Muslim Brotherhood, the political and religious part was put into office. As it turned out however, the Muslim Brotherhood shed their moderate positions and became fully radical as they had finally obtained power. What people did not know, or just did not want to see was that the Brotherhood is political/religious parent of Al Quada. They want Sharia law and other aspects of radical Muslim theology implemented into government. This resulted in the military forcing them out of power and the cause of the current violence in the streets. So how can the United States correct its mistake? How can our government answer for causing this death and destruction?

We failed: Our American government thought we could export democracy, but instead we exported chaos, and hatred for my country grew. We have to learn that we cannot force our ideas on people. People may want to help with all there might to save everyone, but the truth is even a group can be powerless even if that group is one of the strongest nations on Earth. Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Libya, Turkey, and many of the other Arab spring countries are dismal failures of our decisions to meddle in others affairs. It can also be said that we are obsessed with these primarily Muslim countries due to their oil. But, is it worth the blood shed of the innocent men and women in those countries? Is it worth the sacrifice of our soldiers and their families? For me, it is time to divorce ourselves from that region save for maybe our only ally Israel who is standing at the brink of annihilation by its neighbors.

Can we do anything?: There are two things we can do. The first is to evacuate families of people like the Coptic Christians who face oppression and violence in Egypt for both their beliefs and their siding with the military in the Muslims Brotherhoods removal from power. Coptic Christians saw the writing on the wall that they would become victims of Sharia law and be forced into oblivion and they are paying the price for choosing freedom as their churches are burned and their brothers and sisters murdered in the streets. Get them out. Help them by getting them asylum in the United States. We as a nation will welcome such hard working people who have been primarily impoverished all their lives to our nation. We want people like that as they are the kind of people who will take what little is given and make something out of it with a greater value. Likewise there are other people of different faiths and even some members of the Muslim population who also need to escape. Thus I call on the State department to focus on helping these people who need our help the most.

Our second of the two options is to cut off aid. It is imperative that we stop giving money to the Egyptian government and the rebel groups in the area. Yes people will die without that aid, but more people will die with that aid going there. In truth that money does not only help feed people, but it is used to get guns and ammo to continue Egypt's death spiral. It is time to stop perpetuating the violence.

Conclusion: We caused this horror as citizens to by electing Presidents who thought it was their duty to change the world. But it was not their duty to cause war and mayhem. If you truly want to help people around the world, then don't through money at their feet. Do not manipulate their governments and cause revolutions. Just be a beacon of hope by being an example of how a government should act towards its people. Let people have freedom in our own country to people in others will see what we have and want that too. And when they want it, they will enact change under their own power, and all we have to do is welcome them with open arms. So let us get out of this tragic political game of power.

Issue 154 The 4 essentials of welfare September 2, 2013

We have always talked about solutions to the welfare problem, but not the specific aid that welfare should give to the needy. So here they are the four essentials.

1. Medical Aid: People need to have their health maintained. But people on welfare (those who are not abusing the system) typically get sick. This is due to the lack of proper nutrition which weakens the poor person’s immune system. As such, making sure the poor have access to doctors to treat diseases is essential to keeping these people alive and healthy. This can be done in several ways however. You can give these people access to top quality health care by subsidizing health insurance so that the poor can go to any doctor of their choosing (that is if the doctors accept that insurance of course). But there is also the free clinic model which gives the poor access to care for free. Religious institutions and doctors may donate their time to helping the sick as well (something that can be sponsored by government or done as charity). However, these models seem to work best, but each has a draw back. Subsidizing health care or providing health care at the governmental level is expensive and the doctor is also under no obligation to accept the impoverished person’s coverage (though this is fairly rare). The free clinic model has the stigma of not always being the best in terms in the quality of care, while the religious and charitable model may be too small to help everyone. Each has a draw back, but they do help in there own way.

2. Food and general aid: Food and basic clothing are key to keeping people from having to need medical care, let alone starve. Soup kitchens and organizations like the Salvation Army help feed the poor and provide access to clothing and other items that people are in need of. By providing food we prevent people from being malnourished, keep them physically fit so that they have a wider options when it comes to job selection when they finally try to get off welfare. Clothing also is essential, for it not only keeps people warm in winter and cool in summer, but a suit that has been donated goes a long way in helping the impoverished person in an interview as they attempt to get off welfare. Donations seem to work best in combination with soup kitchens when it pertains to ensuring that the welfare is not abused. But there is also the food stamp model which helps the poor pay for the food that they want. However, it is easier to commit fraud in this system and the government has a vested interest in saying what an impoverished can and cannot eat. In a sense it is a potential waste of resources. But we are here to dissect what welfare should address, not how to fix it.

3. Job Training: Yup, job training is included. One part of the reason why people lose their job is because their skills become outmoded. In the age of computers and high tech devices it becomes harder to find a job suitable to skills of a previous generation such as wood working. People who do not find their niche or who appear to be under performing due to their lack of knowledge with technology and newer technology will be the first to be let go in times of financial crisis. Private groups and Charities due offer job training as well.  Businesses that see good people that just need a chance will also help them to learn the skills they need. But that is not always enough. As such government also provides job training, whether it is them training the individual themselves or paying a private company to do the same job. Tax brakes are also offered to businesses if they themselves just need that financial leeway to train people themselves. There is no easy answer to this problem.

4. Unemployment: The final component is unemployment aid. This is simply money given to individuals who have lost their job and need help paying the bills. Sometimes it will be combined with the money that goes toward food and clothing as well. Usually the money you receive here is contingent on something like looking for a job, or has a set limit as to how long you may be on this form of welfare. As such, this may also be combined with job training so that once training is complete and you get a job you no longer receive benefits. Though there are people who abuse this system by making it look like they want a job, showing up for an interview and giving the worst impression possible just so they can continue to receive aid. The only proven way to get off unemployment and get some job training is to implement a welfare to work program where poor people are placed in jobs and they move up on their own while welfare like unemployment and food stamps slowly disappear as income increases. Let us face it; there is a way to make it work.

Conclusion: Welfare is a safety net. It is not meant to give out free cell phones, cars (yup this was done) or to allow people to abuse the system. What people do not know is that more than 70% of programs designed to help the poor end up helping the rich and the freeloaders exclusively. So maybe it is time we got back to basics and help the poor only when it comes to the essentials.

Issue 153 No Middle Managers August 29, 2013

I'll be gone tomorrow and thus be unable to post..as such I will see you all Monday. Enjoy the article and have a great weekend.

What if there was no actual management in a corporation? Would it fail? Well that depends on your business model. Here is how it works.

What is it?: Well the companies that embrace the idea of no middle managers are unique. They do not need people to tell them to do their job. Not only do they do their job, they are already highly motivated and self regulating. And that is actually how the model works. In order for there to be no middle managers in a corporation a company needs people hire only self motivated people who are comfortable with a boss less environment. That environment is also purposely built to work. As such, companies like GitHub (a five year old collaborative software company in San Francisco) or 37signals (another software firm) have it so that its employees may hop on a project in any capacity and then switch roles as needed. Ideas are shared informally and may also go out the door without approval of a lead manager. Sure there is top management, but that is also somewhat informal as well. It does have some advantages as it eliminates pointless titles and bureaucratic bloat in a business which saves money. It also allows some members to work at home as well (especially as software can be made anywhere you have a decent enough computer to use {these are tech companies if you have not noticed yet}). Overall it is based around the same principle as one of 37signals mottos "hire managers of one."

Managers do have there advantages: Professor Ethan Mollick of the University of Pennsylvania's Whaton school looker at 395 companies in the video game industry using 12 years worth of data It found that despite all other factors, middle managers accounted for "22.3% of the performance differences among companies, more than three times as much as the game designers who invent story lines and characters." Basically, middle managers help the bottom and the top of a business communicate which is essential.

Compromise: It has been recognized by companies like Github with its now 200 plus employees that managers are in fact needed in a certain capacity and as such has installed some over site. But they want to maintain freedom and keep out the hierarchy. So the people there avoid the term manager (this goes for the top positions too). Tom Preston-Werner the co-founder and head of Github (what he describes as in name only) prefers words like leader, or the companies acronym "PRP" primarily responsible person." They still allow ideas and decision to go public without approval though as they still hire self regulated people. Some businesses rotate managerial roles amongst the staff where they would keep track of group performance and "ensuring goals are met." The manager of the month would also handle customer-support requests (as this was the customer support section of the business). As such while their smaller counterparts may still be able to get buy without managers, the larger companies are finding creative solutions to maintain the speed and efficiency of the no manager business model (a staffer can potentially overrule his boss on a plan in certain instances in this model). Speed is probably the best advantage this model gives with respect to decision making.

Conclusion: This article comes from The Wall Street Journal "Some tech Firms Ask: Who Needs Managers? Among Smaller Companies, Disdain for Hierarchy Collides With Need for Oversight" by Rachel Emma Silverman. And I decided to show this model (or models) to you all as an alternative some businesses are trying. It seems to work mainly in tech and programming companies as that is where it is suggested that this business model is often used. It is important to note that this model will not work with employees who need that manager looking over their shoulder to make sure they are doing their job. So if you do try this model, be careful to only hire the best and only for roles that they are not only suited for, but who are capable of being their own boss. Good luck in all your endeavors everyone.

Issue 152 Postal Booze August 28, 2013

As the post office is running out of money, they are looking for creative solutions to gaining revenue. This idea was brought to my attention via the Huffington post from CNBC ("U.S. Postal Service Alcohol Delivery Idea Criticized by Merchants").

The idea: The premise is simple, let the post office be able to deliver alcohol and other spirits via the mail. It is a sound idea that I endorse completely. U.S. Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe wants the post office to be able to ship cases of 2, 4, or 6 bottles of booze at a flat rate price. Upon delivery it would have to be signed for by a person over the age of 21 (as proposed in a bill by the U.S. Senate).

Benefits: Money is to be made from this idea. For one, it allows the post office to finally be able to mail alcohol which it was originally banned from doing (they asked people to cover any labels or logos that pertain to alcohol if they reuse a box of spirits). As it stands now the post office lost $740 million in the third quarter of 2013. However, this may help make up for their losses and fund the retirement and health pensions that have become so burdensome to its business.

Consumers are also helped by this as they now have the option to mail beer, wine and others to their friends and neighbors across the entire continental U.S. Let us face it, America likes its spirits and having the option (especially during holiday season) would be worth it to consumers and some sellers. Likewise brewers and wineries would gain the ability to ship their product throughout the U.S. and thus bump up sales. It gives small brewers a chance to be recognized beyond their town boarders, and wineries the chance to attract more people to their brand. Basically you can have your favorite wine shipped directly to your house from the winery rather than go to the store only to find out they do not sell that particular brand. Flexibility becomes key which allows people the freedom of choice (in their glass that is). Many craft brewers already ship through licensed distributors, but this allows them to cut out the middle man.

Problems: Even though it can be done, there is one big problem. State and local laws have to be complied with. A dry county (a district where the sale of alcohol is prohibited to patrons) may prohibit mail order booze. State laws may interfere with times of delivery, or even the type and amount of alcohol that may be mailed and delivered at a given time. Also, it may not be worth the cost to some brewers who may need to hire extra staff just to pack up the boxes and maintain order just to mail the booze in the first place. Beer is "heavy, fragile and perishable" so shipping may actually become a nightmare. Let us also not forget that local liquor stores don't like the idea of mail order booze cutting into their bottom line as it adds more competition. Of course State and local laws may try to protect those local stores from losing money as well.

Conclusion: The Colorado based Brewers Association, which represents 1,797 U.S. craft and larger beer makers has said that certain small brewers with "specialty beers would have an interests in the USPS option." So the idea does have traction and as such will generate revenue for all involved. I can imagine battles in court however over the legality of dry counties and similar laws which may infringe on "interstate commerce." All I can say is that freedom of choice is essential. As such the freedom to buy and sell goods must have no restrictions (excluding prohibited items) to help maintain that freedom. Therefore as a libertarian, I see this as a step in the right direction for the country. Yes I do understand that much of the domestic violence and spousal abuse is due to alcohol and that teens may drive while under the influence, but that is all about personal responsibility. Domestic violence would happen with alcohol regardless and teens driving while intoxicated also will not change as far as I can see. I also endorse reducing the age restrictions on the purchase of alcohol as it has been shown that the younger you are exposed to spirits in general, the less likely you are to drive intoxicated, or drink in excess. So let us loosen up the system and mail some booze.

Issue 151 Principles of peoples war August 27, 2013

I may not like Mao and what he did to his people in China to implement his version of communism, but he did have one thing right and that is the principles of people’s war. Here is how it works.

1. Public relations/propaganda: Here the organization or groups seeking control (terrorist, freedom fighter or both) needs aid by the masses. So they try to make themselves look good through certain actions and deeds. Hamas in the Middle East builds hospitals and schools for people. At the same time they launch propaganda stating that Israel is the root cause for all their problems that their people face. Obviously they won control based on how they now have control of both governments in Gaza and The West Bank. But simple acts like helping the sick or making your enemy look like a monster through information campaigns are effective. Even the U.S. military uses propaganda and public relations techniques to try to get populations to sympathies with them and ally themselves with the U.S. against common enemies even if that is their own government.

2. Guerrilla warfare: In step 2 small raids are carried out on specific targets. These raids are to show that the government is incapable of defending itself and thus put pressure on them. More importantly it is to show that the government cannot protect the people themselves and the peoples fear along with their reaction to it place enormous pressure on the government to do something, including surrendering at times. Basically, the enemy’s power and political will must be reduced as much as possible to make them look and feel helpless. The enemy is therefore forced to react to show their strength. However, as the violence escalates so does the enemy government’s reactions. From there more people side with the terrorists/freedom fighters as they become isolated or become victims themselves of government oppression.

3. All out war: This is the final push. To overthrow the government in "people’s war", it comes down to a swift and violent assault. If the regime is not overthrown then the terrorists/freedom fighters lost. But, that does not mean that the rebellion is over. If the all out war step fails to overthrow the regime, the terrorists/freedom fighters simply go back to steps 1 and 2. Basically, the process is repeated over and over until there is a decided victor. Meanwhile the government in control is either left in a better or worse position than when the conflict first began.

Conclusion: Understanding why and how people fight is essential to figuring out ways to stop violence all together. Thus, today's issue just shows the basic steps that revolutionaries and even terrorists follow to achieve an overthrow of the ruling government. People from George Washington to Mao (who explained/demonstrated the concept in its entirety) have used these steps to get the results they wanted. These steps are a tool so as to achieve a means to an end, but the moral values and the methods and reasons behind it are what determine if the person using the people’s war steps is good or evil.

Issue 150 Evolution of language August 26, 2013

I base today's issue on "What Language Is" by John McWhorter (2011, Gotham books New York) and a science channel special on language. Here we will discuss the possibilities of how language may evolve (with a focus on English as that is my native language). So let's get started.

Evolution: The science channel special performed an experiment to show how language evolves over time. For the experiment they provided a series of pictures featuring colors, and objects and gave them made up names. Then they had an individual look at each picture, try to memorize the name and then after about 15 minutes of memorization try to look at the picture and say the memorized name. Of course most of what they said may have been wrong, but this experiment was to demonstrate on an accelerated scale how language evolves. So the next subject had to do the same thing in the experiment except for one difference. The mistakes on the names that the first person made became the new names. This process was repeated over and over until the names could be remembered by each following subject. What the experiment proved was that language over time simplifies itself through the errors that the language speakers make.

Using capitols: What if a language got rid of all of its silent letters. An example is "bite" with the silent "e" acting as a modifier to make the "i" say its name. But when we capitalize a letter it also says its name, and as such bite can be spelled "bIt" with the capitol "I" saying its name. That is one example, but how about another. "Bait", as in shark bait. Instead of the "i" acting as a modifier it would look like this "bAt" as "A" would say its name and thus make a similar sound compared to the existing word. It would not be confused with "bat" as the "a" here does not say its name (and is not capitalized to do so). Of course capitol letters may be removed entirely as well, so "bite" may turn into "bi`t" instead with the accent mark making the "i" say its name instead. Interesting right.

Removing silent letters and unneeded letters: "Quite" has a silent "u". So what if we got rid of the "u"? It would look like this "qite". It would still mean the same thing only because "q" comes from the sound that "kw" makes together. Of course "kwite" could also result as "q" comes from the combination of "kw". Thus there would no longer be a need for the letter "q". Likewise the letter "c" or "k" may disappear as they make similar sounds. So our language may remove two of them and just keep the one. Or it may even reassign the letter "c" to making the sound that "ch" makes together as another possibility making words like "channel" become "cannel".

Letters that make sounds they should not: Have you ever wondered why the "ti" in nation sounds similar to the sound of "sh". Well what if we did this: "nashon" instead. Or how about replacing the "gh" and "ph" in words where they make the sound that "f" makes with an actual "f". Part of the reason that English is so hard to learn is that different letters in combination make the same sounds as other letters. So you can spell "fish" as "ghoti" with "gh" the "f" sound from "enough", the "o" sounding like "i" from "women" and the "ti" the "sh" sound from "nation". Basically some people may just make the language more phonetic.

Word replacement: Some times we have words that are spelt the same or even spelt different but ultimately sound the same. So let us use the words "see" and "sea" and "bear and bear". It is possible to substitute words in English with words from other cultures like Spanish or Japanese. The reason is that English is very flexible when it comes to adopting new terms like "ghetto" or the name "Sean" as our culture takes in not just the immigrant but their language as well. So we may for example have bear (for grizzly bear) spelt as "kuma" which is Japanese for bear, while leaving the word bear to mean something along the lines of "bear skin". Likewise "sea" could be called something else entirely or just be replaced by the word "ocean". Though most languages tend to simplify words and thus smaller easier to say words take hold more often when describing something.

Conclusion: Stuff like slang terms from different cultures and groups of people may become common terms like "floordrobe" which has been added to the dictionary (found this out through national geographic magazine). Language is a communication tool that evolves to meet peoples every day challenges, but that is because mistakes made, like spelling "cat" as "kat" may become the new way to spell things. Even letters like "A" may loose its horizontal line in the middle or "K" loosing its vertical line to look like this "<" may occur. We really do not know what the future of our language is or how other languages may evolve along side it (or even fuse together for that matter). All I can say is that the possibilities are as endless as they are fascinating.

Issue 149 Gangs August 23, 2013

A gang is a group of individuals who come together for a common purpose. Or at least that is the least strict in terms of definitions. But what is a gang about, and why do they exist?

Safety: Some gangs form so that they can protect each other. As most gangs sell drugs and extort businesses, they need to protect their area from rival dealers, gangs and the police. So groups of drug dealers and hustlers come together with the common goal of mutual protection. A hierarchy typically develops with some one or a group of individuals giving direction to the rest. That individual or group is now responsible for the safety of the rest and directs how the rest of the gang in how it is to protect itself.

Initiation: Some gangs don't start out as gangs. They start as individuals being friends. A person may be friends with another and thus that friend slowly pulls them into the gang by introducing them to the other members. And this friend who was originally not part of the gang begins hanging out there while trying to get a sense of belonging. Then this individual goes through some sort of initiation. Initiations range from just being accepted, to petty theft, to murder and rape. For some gangs like the Crips, their initiation is to kill a member of their rival gang the Bloods. Though the California Crips and Bloods have generally made peace, initiation rights vary from region to region and from gang to gang.

One other form of initiation is putting the person in debt with the gang. The recruiter will buy them gifts, but then finally have the recruited individual pay them back in some way. Usually this is done by selling drugs, but can include killing and/or kidnapping some one. Once the job is done they are either let go to be arrested by the police or make it so that the only place to turn is the gang itself. From there they become a new member who will do the gangs bidding.

It is all about money: Gangs do not really care about their members. In fact most are expendable foot soldiers that are easily replaced. Not even the other leaders are safe as the gang members are corrupted by greed. Remember that gangs exist to fend off rival gangs and in some instances take territory from other gangs by force. Money is to be made through extortion, drugs, sex slavery and even sometimes an assassination business. Comradely is fictional as long as money is in the picture. Remember, they do not care who you are, for if you are in the way of their money making business they will remove you.

They help the terrorists: Yes these gangs that sell drugs may be involved with terrorist groups. They may be involved with Al Quada, or even government sponsored gangs like MS 13 which is supported by the Venezuelan government. Gangs do not care where they get their product from, they just want the cash. So they will buy and sell for these terrorists to make a profit, while terrorists get money from this partnership to fund their operations. Very scary isn't it.

Conclusion: Gangs are the modern day mafia. They can be as powerful as the drug cartels in Latin America, to as lowly as a street gang. Some are peaceful like the anti-drug groups like "strait edge", but they are an exception not the rule. The only thing they have in common is a desire for money. Members are recruited regularly to carry out new crimes and to act as drug mules. In some cases, if you do not comply you are killed. This is a problem facing every country all over the globe as these gangs no matter there origin corrupt the young and turn them into criminals. Sure we can fight back by legalizing Weed, (60% of the drug cartels revenue comes from "pot") or trying out new policing techniques. However, the only sure fire strategy is to improve education and opportunity. If there is no alternative to the gang that is more appealing, then the members will stay in the gang. We can take our cities and our countries children back from criminality and turn peaceful examples of gangs like "strait edge" into the norm.