Monthly Archives: April 2016

Minimum Wage Laws and Special Groups Impact

Posted on by
Reply

Fast-food workers and civil rights groups in Birmingham, AL, are mounting a constitutional challenge to a recent state law that bars cities from setting their own higher minimum wages, alleging the law violates the workers civil rights.

The plaintiffs filed a federal lawsuit Thursday against the state’s Republican Gov Robert Bentley, claiming the bill he signed into law in February was tainted with “racial animus” toward the predominantly African-American city.

One of the lawsuit’s main claims is that the state law disproportionately impacts minority residents who live and work in Birmingham, many in low-wage, fast-food industry jobs that leave them impoverished and on public assistance.

Using their own logic, minimum wage laws, having as they do a disproportionate impact on minorities, on single mothers, and on teens (especially minority teens, but teens generally) are themselves tainted with “racial animus,” “gender animus,” yes, even “age animus.”

Hmm….

Cyberthreat Information Sharing

Posted on by
Reply

The public and private sectors need to increasingly declassify and divulge critical information if the U.S. is to set up effective cyberthreat organizations, according to a report released Wednesday by PwC that sets out a blueprint for how those groups could be set up.

That would certainly lead to faster responses to hack attempts—committed by anyone, whether governments foreign or domestic or criminals—and to more efficient hardening against present and future hack attempts.

Unfortunately, FBI Director James Comey has already written off the concept of public sector—at the Federal government level, anyway—cyberthreat sharing.

That’s a very clear indication of what this administration and its potential Progressive-Democrat successor administration thinks about Government controls.

A Foreign Policy Fallout

Posted on by
Reply

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced Tuesday that the biggest military contract in Australia’s history, a $40 billion tender to build 12 submarines, will go to a French naval contractor.  That’s a defeat for Japan’s bid, and with it a lost opportunity to deepen cooperation among the leading Pacific democracies facing China’s rising military.

For all of Turnbull’s rationalizations, this was a major factor in rejecting the Japanese offer:

The most significant influence may have been China, Australia’s largest trading partner, which openly campaigned against Japan’s bid. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi warned his Australian counterpart in February to remember World War II….

Yeah.  The PRC disapproved, and Australia, with the strength of its American ally demonstrated by our response to the PRC’s occupation of the South China Sea, knuckled under.  Don’t think Japan, in the face of our response to the PRC’s occupation attempts in the East China Sea, isn’t watching this very carefully, and not only for the implications to its shipbuilding industry.

Divide and conquer works.  Especially when the two being divided from each other have been abandoned by a United States become timorous in the face of PRC behaviors.

Narcissism and Scientism

Posted on by
Reply

These are two different concepts, but I’m not convinced they’re unrelated.

First is a Wall Street Journal Notable & Quotable:

[The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5] . . . criteria for narcissistic personality disorder include these features:

Having an exaggerated sense of self-importance
Expecting to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
Exaggerating your achievements and talents
Being preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate…
Behaving in an arrogant or haughty manner

And

You may have secret feelings of insecurity, shame, vulnerability and humiliation.  To feel better, you may react with rage or contempt and try to belittle the other person to make yourself appear superior.

Second is another Notable & Quotable:

Now…science and especially science bureaucracy is a career, and one amenable to social climbing.  Careers attract careerists, in [Paul] Feyerabend’s words: “devoid of ideas, full of fear, intent on producing some paltry result so that they can add to the flood of inane papers that now constitutes ‘scientific progress’ in many areas.”

And

If science was unprepared for the influx of careerists, it was even less prepared for the blossoming of the Cult of Science.  The Cult is related to the phenomenon described as “scientism;” both have a tendency to treat the body of scientific knowledge as a holy book or an a-religious revelation that offers simple and decisive resolutions to deep questions.  But it adds to this a pinch of glib frivolity and a dash of unembarrassed ignorance.

Hmm….

Another PRC Challenge of the US

Posted on by
Reply

The PRC now is exploring Scarborough Shoal with the intent to expand its control over the South China Sea and to pose a more proximate threat to an American ally, this one the Republic of the Philippines.  Scarborough Shoal, as most of you know, is just 120 nautical miles from the Philippines 200 nautical miles from the capital, Manila.  Scarborough also is 470 nautical miles from the PRC.

In posing this challenge to the Philippines, the PRC also is making an in-your-face move against the US, with the intent of separating the RP from the US and of showing to the rest of the nations in the region just how little is the value of aligning with us.  The Obama administration is answering that challenge in just the way the PRC is anticipating—with timidity [emphasis added].

The six US aircraft that flew near Scarborough Shoal on April 19 are based at Clark [AB, 50 miles NW of Manila].  The four A-10 Thunderbolt fighters and two HH-60 Pave Hawk helicopters “conducted a flying mission through international airspace…providing air and maritime situational awareness,” the US Air Force statement said.

None of the US flights flew to within 12 nautical miles of Scarborough, according to a US official, which would have amounted to a legal challenge to China’s claims on the shoal, but the proximity of the flights was clearly intended to send a message to Beijing.

A message was sent, all right.  By deliberately not challenging the legality of the PRC’s claims, the Obama administration said most clearly, “We accept your legal rights; we’re just making a feeble face-saving gesture.  Please.”

Elections have consequences.  And not only for us Americans.