Comments on: The Brutal Pessimism of the New York Times http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/ Refunds Cheerfully Given To All Who Disagree Sat, 07 Apr 2012 09:00:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: fistfuloffortnights.net http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5406 fistfuloffortnights.net Mon, 12 Sep 2005 09:32:28 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5406 <strong>RINOs Without A Hero?</strong> ... RINOs Without A Hero?

…

]]> By: Clint http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5177 Clint Tue, 06 Sep 2005 17:41:09 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5177 Interesting question for an intrepid investigative journalist somewhere (if such people still exist)... How did the state of Louisiana spend its Homeland Security money? Interesting question for an intrepid investigative journalist somewhere (if such people still exist)…

How did the state of Louisiana spend its Homeland Security money?

]]> By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5176 peter Tue, 06 Sep 2005 16:22:36 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5176 I think a lot of the answer to "where did homeland security money go" is the formula which allocated funds by state -- instead of the bulk of the money going to places with a high likelihood of terrorist or natural catastrophe, it was distributed as a pork barrel project so places like Nebraska and South Dakota received funds which would have been spent more wisely elsewhere -- I think a lot of the answer to “where did homeland security money go” is the formula which allocated funds by state — instead of the bulk of the money going to places with a high likelihood of terrorist or natural catastrophe, it was distributed as a pork barrel project so places like Nebraska and South Dakota received funds which would have been spent more wisely elsewhere –

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5175 Mark Tue, 06 Sep 2005 16:06:01 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5175 peter, I'm with you there...one thought that keeps going through my mind is, "4 years after 9/11 and this is the best we can do? Where did all that homeland security money go?"...one thing I think both sides can agree on - wherever the blame (and, as you say, there's plenty to go around) - clearly there were big, lethal problems that need to be worked through... peter, I’m with you there…one thought that keeps going through my mind is, “4 years after 9/11 and this is the best we can do? Where did all that homeland security money go?”…one thing I think both sides can agree on – wherever the blame (and, as you say, there’s plenty to go around) – clearly there were big, lethal problems that need to be worked through…

]]> By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5173 peter Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:46:03 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5173 Well, of course smarter government is better than either larger or smaller. China has a pretty big government, without much to show for it. I used to live in Hong Kong, which (pre-1997) had a fairly large bureaucracy, but it functioned better than any other place I have ever been. Large doesn't equate to good -- but if you "starve the beast" I believe that it requires far more skill than governments generally have to have a state which meets the people's needs. The President, in addition to everything else, is something like a CEO. He has a lot of levers (especially with a friendly Congress) to downsize, expand, or organize the government as he (or, in 2009, she) sees fit. It is fair to judge him on the consequences of the decisions which are made. Regarding who should be blamed: kinda looks like everybody. I liked John Tierney's column in the Times today about the magic marker thing. However, Louisiana government has been rotten since the days of Huey Long. I expected inadequcy from them. I was hoping for something better from the Feds. Well, of course smarter government is better than either larger or smaller. China has a pretty big government, without much to show for it. I used to live in Hong Kong, which (pre-1997) had a fairly large bureaucracy, but it functioned better than any other place I have ever been. Large doesn’t equate to good — but if you “starve the beast” I believe that it requires far more skill than governments generally have to have a state which meets the people’s needs.

The President, in addition to everything else, is something like a CEO. He has a lot of levers (especially with a friendly Congress) to downsize, expand, or organize the government as he (or, in 2009, she) sees fit. It is fair to judge him on the consequences of the decisions which are made.

Regarding who should be blamed: kinda looks like everybody. I liked John Tierney’s column in the Times today about the magic marker thing. However, Louisiana government has been rotten since the days of Huey Long. I expected inadequcy from them. I was hoping for something better from the Feds.

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5169 Mark Tue, 06 Sep 2005 14:58:11 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5169 peter, you're such a skunk!...just joking, of course. Here we have, I think, one of the fundamental differences between you and I, regarding the following analogy. Larger government:smaller government as efficient government:inefficient government. I grant you that Katrina has highlighted huge problems in federal disaster recovery, but I think the main one is that FEMA perhaps needs to be removed from Homeland Security (as, I think, you yourself suggested in an earlier post). I had a post earlier on an editorial that pointed out, however, that FEMA was never intended to be the first responder, and it is becoming increasingly clear, at least to me, that New Orleans and Louisiana officials must bear the brunt of the blame for their totally inept initial response over the first 48-72 hours. peter, you’re such a skunk!…just joking, of course. Here we have, I think, one of the fundamental differences between you and I, regarding the following analogy. Larger government:smaller government as efficient government:inefficient government. I grant you that Katrina has highlighted huge problems in federal disaster recovery, but I think the main one is that FEMA perhaps needs to be removed from Homeland Security (as, I think, you yourself suggested in an earlier post). I had a post earlier on an editorial that pointed out, however, that FEMA was never intended to be the first responder, and it is becoming increasingly clear, at least to me, that New Orleans and Louisiana officials must bear the brunt of the blame for their totally inept initial response over the first 48-72 hours.

]]> By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5168 peter Tue, 06 Sep 2005 13:54:51 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5168 Well, I hate to be the skunk at the garden party again, but I think Krugman makes a very valid point which you have not refuted. If you shrink government, you will have a state with fewer resources. If you have fewer resources, you are less able to do things like maintain levees and respond to catastrophes. It is a reasonable question to ask whether the philosophy of small government leads to a diminution of the federal government's effectiveness. This linkage seems self-evident to me. Regardless, Krugman doesn't blame Kartina on "all small government conservatives" -- rather, he blames government "ineptitude" on those with a small government philosophy. I think it is reasonable to ask how big government ought to be, and whether the Bush administration's shift to smaller government is the right choice. (To be precise: smaller in the sense of shrinking certain parts of the government, which regrettably included funding for coastal maintenance). MSNBC compared the $105 million which was requested by the Army Corps for New Orleans (of which $40 million was approved) to the $450 million to build bridges to uninhabited islands in Alaska as part of the recent energy bill. I realize that pork has long been part of appropriations bills, but some things are so egregious that they deserve an honored place in the Porker Hall of Fame. I think it is also reasonable to ask whether the (Republican) Congress should be held accountable for passing this bill and whether Bush should be accountable for not vetoing it (or, for that matter, any other bill --appropriations or otherwise -- in his term in office). Regarding Krugman's mention of Brown as a political appointee: of course there have been political appointees since day one, but that is irrelevant. The President is responsible for those he appoints, whether they are political appointees or not. If you name a political appointee to run FEMA and the appointee fails, then the President is responsible. If you want to name a political appointee as ambassador to the Duchy of Grand Fenwick, then fine -- there's not much downside there. However, if you give a position like FEMA head to an inexperienced person whose sole qualification appears to be having been the college roommate of one of Bush's friends, then you have made a reckless move which endangers American lives. Whether previous administrations also gave patronage jobs has nothing to do with it. Well, I hate to be the skunk at the garden party again, but I think Krugman makes a very valid point which you have not refuted. If you shrink government, you will have a state with fewer resources. If you have fewer resources, you are less able to do things like maintain levees and respond to catastrophes. It is a reasonable question to ask whether the philosophy of small government leads to a diminution of the federal government’s effectiveness. This linkage seems self-evident to me. Regardless, Krugman doesn’t blame Kartina on “all small government conservatives” — rather, he blames government “ineptitude” on those with a small government philosophy. I think it is reasonable to ask how big government ought to be, and whether the Bush administration’s shift to smaller government is the right choice. (To be precise: smaller in the sense of shrinking certain parts of the government, which regrettably included funding for coastal maintenance).

MSNBC compared the $105 million which was requested by the Army Corps for New Orleans (of which $40 million was approved) to the $450 million to build bridges to uninhabited islands in Alaska as part of the recent energy bill. I realize that pork has long been part of appropriations bills, but some things are so egregious that they deserve an honored place in the Porker Hall of Fame. I think it is also reasonable to ask whether the (Republican) Congress should be held accountable for passing this bill and whether Bush should be accountable for not vetoing it (or, for that matter, any other bill –appropriations or otherwise — in his term in office).

Regarding Krugman’s mention of Brown as a political appointee: of course there have been political appointees since day one, but that is irrelevant. The President is responsible for those he appoints, whether they are political appointees or not. If you name a political appointee to run FEMA and the appointee fails, then the President is responsible. If you want to name a political appointee as ambassador to the Duchy of Grand Fenwick, then fine — there’s not much downside there. However, if you give a position like FEMA head to an inexperienced person whose sole qualification appears to be having been the college roommate of one of Bush’s friends, then you have made a reckless move which endangers American lives. Whether previous administrations also gave patronage jobs has nothing to do with it.

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5167 Mark Tue, 06 Sep 2005 11:45:25 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5167 Just the online readers, I think...we shall see... Just the online readers, I think…we shall see…

]]> By: fatman http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5163 fatman Tue, 06 Sep 2005 05:38:00 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5163 I'm amazed you didn't have a stroke reading that horse offal. I felt my blood pressure go up ten points just reading the excerpts. BTW, does the NYT moving their columnists to (I presume) on-line subscription-only status affect their print operations or just the online readers? If it's the former, then my local birdcage liner (The People's Republic of Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) will be getting an upgrade, if they haven't already. I’m amazed you didn’t have a stroke reading that horse offal. I felt my blood pressure go up ten points just reading the excerpts.

BTW, does the NYT moving their columnists to (I presume) on-line subscription-only status affect their print operations or just the online readers? If it’s the former, then my local birdcage liner (The People’s Republic of Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) will be getting an upgrade, if they haven’t already.

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/comment-page-1/#comment-5160 Mark Tue, 06 Sep 2005 02:27:51 +0000 http://decision08.net/2005/09/05/the-brutal-pessimism-of-the-new-york-times/#comment-5160 Well, that's how noble I am...I sacrifice my own well-being so that my readers don't have to... Well, that’s how noble I am…I sacrifice my own well-being so that my readers don’t have to…

]]>