…we band of brothers.
Apparently, there were more Englishman, and fewer French, at Agincourt than mythology about it would have us believe:
Resurrection
There are people building and flying new Messerschmitt ME-262s. Looks like it would be a fun little airplane, albeit a little pricy to operate.
Auction H-1B Visas
The limit for H-1B visas is 65,000 this year and next down from 195,000 in 2001-2003 according to US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Since foreign technical service personnel are literally worth their weight in gold, this is detrimental to the US economy. The London fix on gold (according to WSJ–subscription required) was $418.25 per troy ounce Friday. Each troy ounce is 31.1 grams or so. The average weight of a US adult is 177.3 lbs according to CDC. That much gold can be bought for $1.08 million. A technical services worker costs about $47,000/year according to the Federal Reserve of St. Louis. If the relative prices stay the same, 23 years of work will net $1.08 million. Technical services are likely to become more valuable compared to gold over time.
In the New York Times today, John Tierney talks about Julian Simon’s research showing that war has become less lethal over the years as a leading cause of death and the trend has continued. Simon was also a big believer in the value of human capital as am I.
His argument in The Ultimate Resource 2 showed that while more births cost more at first (not counting the joy of parenthood), they resulted in more economic growth when they grew up. There is no delay associated with H-1B visas. The import of human capital will immediately speed US growth. These people were already raised overseas and represent a pure boon to the US economy.
There are individual losers, of course. US technical service workers earn less if people are imported from overseas. But protectionism always results in lower aggregate GDP than free trade. There ought to be a way to compensate US technical service workers for the wage loss they will suffer while still allowing the increase in foreign workers and have a win-win or at least a win/small loss.
My proposal is to have US citizens classify themselves into categories according to proof of training. Then the citizens can get some cash from the proceeds of an H-1 B visa auction if people are being imported in their classification. I also propose that the application process be a short form and that the only reason to reject a form would be the auction price and falsification. That is, any reason to immigrate would be fine as long as the auction price was right. The penalty for falsification would only be to make sure the auction proceeds went to the right people.
I would prefer that they just open the floodgates to a million or more immigrants per year with no evidence of need required. Just set the price so that the benefit of the marginal immigrant exceeds the cost. If Simon did the analysis, we would probably end up subsidizing immigration instead of discouraging it. We should continue to refine our tax code, regulations and improve our environment so the US is the most excellent place to live.
Mazel Tov
Herman Wouk is ninety years old today.
Another Lost Soldier
To quote someone else, heh.
Seriously, though, it is kind of amazing that there are still Japanese soldiers coming home from WW II after all these years. It was always a big story back in the sixties whenever one of these guys was found hiding out on some remote island (there was even a Gilligan’s Island episode based on one–see number fifteen in the link), and that was only twenty years after the war. Now it’s sixty.
Still Stuck On Science
Here’s a pretty good take on NASA’s current situation by the Economist.
My main complaint comes toward the end, when it seems to lament that this isn’t about science. Who says it should be?
Nanny State?
KLo is upset by this apparent meddling by the New York City Council in the number of male/female restrooms required in public facilities.
I fail to see the cause for umbrage. Given that there are going to be ordinances specifying that there be restrooms at all (and there are much more serious depredations on liberty than such ordinances to be concerned with), why not respond to clear demand, and establish a sufficient number of each type? It’s blindingly obvious that (mostly male) architects seem clueless as to the disparity between male/female toiletry issues. When there are consistently long lines for something, it’s an indication of a shortage of supply, and one to which the market seems impervious, given the captive-audience nature of the situation in, say, a sports stadium. I remember when the Getty first opened, it had a serious shortage of bathrooms for both sexes, and as an engineer was appalled at Meier’s apparent lack of common sense, focusing instead on pure aesthetics. It would be nice if the designers would get a clue, but given that they continue not to, I’ve got a lot bigger things to worry about than this.
President Clinton In ’08?
I don’t think so. This is just a poll of “Americans,” not “likely” or even “registered” voters. It mainly reflects name recognition.
Besides, the Slick Grope Vets, including Juanita Broaddrick, will have plenty to say if she actually runs.
I’ve previously speculated that Bill Clinton wouldn’t have survived the blogosphere, had it existed in the early nineties. I don’t think that Hillary will either.
[Update at 11:15 AM EDT]
In response to some snark in the comments section, I decided to pull this up into the main post:
I’d just like to point out, for the benefit of the visitors here who didn’t buy the Clinton Chronicles Criterion Edition DVD, that the 3rd of your links itself includes links that suggest the Clintons murdered both Vince Foster, Ron Brown, and at least 34 other innocent people.
Ahhh, six degrees of separation of links. Pardon me while my eyes roll.
Rand, would you care to state, for the record, whether you believe either of those scenarios are true?
With regard to Vince Foster, I have no idea who killed him, but I think that, based on the publicly available evidence, it is extremely unlikely that he died in Fort Marcy Park, and there is little evidence to prove that he died by his own hand, and quite a bit the other way. The case was so badly botched that we’ll probably never know what happened, absent a confession on someone’s part. I do think it likely that the Clintons know who is responsible, but certainly can’t prove that. I also find it amusing that those who would otherwise demonize Ken Starr accept his word unquestioningly when it comes to the Foster report.
The Ron Brown death was extremely suspicious, and convenient to the Clintons in its timing, but again, I’m not going make any direct accusations. As in the Foster case, I lack sufficient data.
Anyways, for all the whining about how Democrats have no ideas, I’m thrilled to hear the GOP plans on leading with Bill’s character issues in their effort to tear Hillary down.
I said nothing about GOP plans. Not being a member of the GOP, I’ve no idea what their plans are (hint: not everyone who thinks that Bill Clinton was corrupt is a “right winger” or a Republican). I was describing the potential response of the blogosphere and the women he (and his wife) molested, slandered and libeled. Thanks for playing, though.
And if you think none of the potential GOP nominees have exploitable character issues, well, whatever. IOKIYAR and all.
Those are theoretical. Hillary’s are real.
[One more update at 2 PM]
Many of the objections in comments are beside the point, because this isn’t about Bill Clinton’s sexual behavior–it’s about his and Hillary’s (often successful) attempts at character assassination of his accusers.
President Clinton In ’08?
I don’t think so. This is just a poll of “Americans,” not “likely” or even “registered” voters. It mainly reflects name recognition.
Besides, the Slick Grope Vets, including Juanita Broaddrick, will have plenty to say if she actually runs.
I’ve previously speculated that Bill Clinton wouldn’t have survived the blogosphere, had it existed in the early nineties. I don’t think that Hillary will either.
[Update at 11:15 AM EDT]
In response to some snark in the comments section, I decided to pull this up into the main post:
I’d just like to point out, for the benefit of the visitors here who didn’t buy the Clinton Chronicles Criterion Edition DVD, that the 3rd of your links itself includes links that suggest the Clintons murdered both Vince Foster, Ron Brown, and at least 34 other innocent people.
Ahhh, six degrees of separation of links. Pardon me while my eyes roll.
Rand, would you care to state, for the record, whether you believe either of those scenarios are true?
With regard to Vince Foster, I have no idea who killed him, but I think that, based on the publicly available evidence, it is extremely unlikely that he died in Fort Marcy Park, and there is little evidence to prove that he died by his own hand, and quite a bit the other way. The case was so badly botched that we’ll probably never know what happened, absent a confession on someone’s part. I do think it likely that the Clintons know who is responsible, but certainly can’t prove that. I also find it amusing that those who would otherwise demonize Ken Starr accept his word unquestioningly when it comes to the Foster report.
The Ron Brown death was extremely suspicious, and convenient to the Clintons in its timing, but again, I’m not going make any direct accusations. As in the Foster case, I lack sufficient data.
Anyways, for all the whining about how Democrats have no ideas, I’m thrilled to hear the GOP plans on leading with Bill’s character issues in their effort to tear Hillary down.
I said nothing about GOP plans. Not being a member of the GOP, I’ve no idea what their plans are (hint: not everyone who thinks that Bill Clinton was corrupt is a “right winger” or a Republican). I was describing the potential response of the blogosphere and the women he (and his wife) molested, slandered and libeled. Thanks for playing, though.
And if you think none of the potential GOP nominees have exploitable character issues, well, whatever. IOKIYAR and all.
Those are theoretical. Hillary’s are real.
[One more update at 2 PM]
Many of the objections in comments are beside the point, because this isn’t about Bill Clinton’s sexual behavior–it’s about his and Hillary’s (often successful) attempts at character assassination of his accusers.
President Clinton In ’08?
I don’t think so. This is just a poll of “Americans,” not “likely” or even “registered” voters. It mainly reflects name recognition.
Besides, the Slick Grope Vets, including Juanita Broaddrick, will have plenty to say if she actually runs.
I’ve previously speculated that Bill Clinton wouldn’t have survived the blogosphere, had it existed in the early nineties. I don’t think that Hillary will either.
[Update at 11:15 AM EDT]
In response to some snark in the comments section, I decided to pull this up into the main post:
I’d just like to point out, for the benefit of the visitors here who didn’t buy the Clinton Chronicles Criterion Edition DVD, that the 3rd of your links itself includes links that suggest the Clintons murdered both Vince Foster, Ron Brown, and at least 34 other innocent people.
Ahhh, six degrees of separation of links. Pardon me while my eyes roll.
Rand, would you care to state, for the record, whether you believe either of those scenarios are true?
With regard to Vince Foster, I have no idea who killed him, but I think that, based on the publicly available evidence, it is extremely unlikely that he died in Fort Marcy Park, and there is little evidence to prove that he died by his own hand, and quite a bit the other way. The case was so badly botched that we’ll probably never know what happened, absent a confession on someone’s part. I do think it likely that the Clintons know who is responsible, but certainly can’t prove that. I also find it amusing that those who would otherwise demonize Ken Starr accept his word unquestioningly when it comes to the Foster report.
The Ron Brown death was extremely suspicious, and convenient to the Clintons in its timing, but again, I’m not going make any direct accusations. As in the Foster case, I lack sufficient data.
Anyways, for all the whining about how Democrats have no ideas, I’m thrilled to hear the GOP plans on leading with Bill’s character issues in their effort to tear Hillary down.
I said nothing about GOP plans. Not being a member of the GOP, I’ve no idea what their plans are (hint: not everyone who thinks that Bill Clinton was corrupt is a “right winger” or a Republican). I was describing the potential response of the blogosphere and the women he (and his wife) molested, slandered and libeled. Thanks for playing, though.
And if you think none of the potential GOP nominees have exploitable character issues, well, whatever. IOKIYAR and all.
Those are theoretical. Hillary’s are real.
[One more update at 2 PM]
Many of the objections in comments are beside the point, because this isn’t about Bill Clinton’s sexual behavior–it’s about his and Hillary’s (often successful) attempts at character assassination of his accusers.