Tag Archives: political economy

No National Defense for You

Posted on by
1

Many Microsoft employees don’t want the United States to be able to defend itself—to defend its citizens and resident aliens.

More than 150 Microsoft employees signed a letter demanding the tech giant cancel a $480 million contract to build a HoloLens for the Pentagon, saying they “refuse to create technology for warfare and oppression.”

And

We are alarmed that Microsoft is working to provide weapons technology to the US military, helping one country’s government “increase lethality” using tools we built. We did not sign up to develop weapons, and we demand a say in how our work is used[.]

Never mind their ideology that our nation should not be allowed to have the tools necessary for our defense, their arrogance—employees demanding veto authority over their boss’ decision—is itself unacceptable.

These Precious Ones should be terminated for cause over their refusal to work the contract.  Their insubordinate arrogance is just confirmation of the need for Microsoft to see the backs of them.

One more thing: if this is the best Silicon Valley—or the Redmond-Seattle environs—can do for employees, Microsoft should give serious thought to relocating.

No Delay

Posted on by
Reply

European Council President Donald Tusk, whose contempt for the Brits and their move to free themselves of the European Union is well known, now is insisting that Great Britain just willy-nilly delay its exit past the current legally mandated 29 March date.

European Council President Donald Tusk said that keeping the current divorce date at March 29 would be risky, as a revised deal is not in sight and businesses are worried about a chaotic exit under a “no deal” situation.

Perhaps a no-deal Brexit would be risky, but it would be considerably less risky, though, than adhering to the (failed in Parliament) “deal” imposed on a too timid British Prime Minister Teresa May that would leave the Brits in servitude to the EU.

Nor will it be as chaotic as the moles of Brussels make it out to be.  While London-based financial companies, for instance, are opening branches in continental capitals (particularly Berlin), they’re not pulling up stakes.

So far, May is showing some new-found backbone and staying on schedule.  She needs to maintain that; Brexit, deal or no deal, must occur on time.

Full stop.

Update: Sadly, this is more typical of May’s backbone:

Prime Minister Theresa May will allow parliament to vote to delay the U.K.’s exit from the European Union if lawmakers reject her divorce agreement next month….

The EU, Tariffs, and Trade

Posted on by
Reply

A collection of EU ministers are meeting in Bucharest to decide, among other things, how to retaliate against President Donald Trump’s tariff regime, which he has proposed implementing if the EU continues to not negotiate tariffs or US-EU trade in general.

German Economy Minister Peter Altmaier wants the ministers to act in unison, but he also has a more constructive view of how to approach negotiations with us.

…car tariffs between the US and Europe should be reduced and completely abolished.

Indeed.  It’s what the German auto industry wants, too, and Trump has on offer a completely tariff-free trade regime for the US and the EU.

The EU’s Trade Commission also estimates that were just the industrial goods tariffs, which average 4%, removed,

 exports in both directions could be boosted by 8% or 9% by 2033.

Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom:

We need to start negotiating[.]

So what’s the hold-up here?  Hmm….

Putin Threatens

Posted on by
Reply

Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking during his state-of-the-nation address Wednesday, warned that Russia will aim new hypersonic missiles at the US should it deploy new intermediate-range missiles in Europe.

Russia and its predecessor USSR have aimed weapons, including nuclear weapons—ICBMs, SLBMS, nuclear-armed bombers—at the US since they first acquired the weapons.  Does anyone really believe Putin doesn’t already have nuclear weapons aimed at the US today?  Is anyone interested in some beachfront property north of Santa Fe?

No, Putin’s threat just puts a premium on our deploying anti-missile systems at home, in Europe, around Asia, and in orbit as well as on developing heavily upgraded such systems and then deploying them, too.  Putin’s threat also puts a premium on developing upgraded offensive systems, including nuclear, and deploying them at home, in Europe, around Asia, and in orbit.

This is an arms race that Russia can no more afford to sustain technologically or fiscally than could the USSR a prior arms race.  It’s an arms race we should strongly encourage and actively pursue.

Amy Klobuchar the Progressive

Posted on by
Reply

Senator Amy Klobuchar (D, MN) and Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential primary candidate is proud to declare herself Progressive, for all that her mouth keeps saying words of centrism, highlighting her work bridging the political divide.

I think [voters] should see me as a progressive because I believe in progress and I have worked towards progress my whole life.

Here’s Herb Croly, one of the founders of the modern Progressive movement.  I’ve cited him on other occasions; this should be a familiar quote.

[A]ny increase in centralized power and responsibility, expedient or inexpedient, is injurious to certain aspects of traditional American democracy.  But the fault in that case lies with the democratic tradition; and the erroneous and misleading tradition must yield before the march of constructive national democracy….  [T]he average American individual is morally and intellectually inadequate to serious and consistent conception of his responsibilities as a democrat.

The necessity for increased centralization of government power that’s claimed by the Progressive-Democratic Party is illustrated by the attempted nationalization of our health care coverage industry that is Obamacare (which we weren’t allowed to know anything about until the bill was passed, recall).  It’s illustrated by the Progressive-Democratic Party’s incessant demand for ever higher taxes and ever higher spending.  It’s Illustrated by Progressive-Democrats’ crowing over having “successfully” driven Amazon out of Long Island City before it even arrived (a withdrawal with which I agreed, but not for Party reasons).  It’s illustrated by the Progressive-Democratic Party’s, and nearly all of its declared and not-yet-declared candidates for President’s enthusiastic endorsement of the Green New Deal, which seeks to nationalize our energy, auto, construction industries—virtually our entire economy—and get it done within 10 years.

Today’s Progressives’ contempt for Americans, echoing Croly’s, is illustrated by ex-President Barack Obama’s (D) dismissal of tens of millions of us as bitter Bible-clingers and gun-toters living in flyover country.  Today’s Progressives’ contempt for Americans is illustrated by the Progressive-Democratic Party’s just prior Presidential candidate dismissing tens of millions of Americans as irredeemably deplorable racist, misogynistic homophobes.  Today’s Progressives’ contempt for Americans is illustrated by their dismissal of the need to secure our borders and the need to control who we let into our country.

Progressive, indeed.  There’s nothing moderate about Progressivism, and Klobuchar is proud—insistent—to be known as a Progressive.