Magnifisyncopathological

From tonight until the 12th of July, I'll be out of town visiting some friends. Net access will be dismal at best. Be back later.

Posted by drizzten at 04:33 PM | Permalink

[Updates below.]

Today is my 23rd birthday, my second since I started working at my current job, my third since permanently moving back to Austin, my fifth since graduating Canyon High School, and my seventh since my father retired from the Army and we moved from Fort Knox, KY to New Braunfels.

Today in History

Forty years ago, on June 26, 1963, President Kennedy visited West Berlin, where he made his famous declaration: "Ich bin ein Berliner" (I am a Berliner).

On this date:

In 1870, the first section of the Atlantic City, N.J., Boardwalk was opened to the public.

In 1900, a commission that included Dr. Walter Reed began the fight against the deadly disease yellow fever.

In 1917, the first troops of the American Expeditionary Force arrived in France during World War I.

In 1925, Charlie Chaplin's classic comedy, "The Gold Rush," premiered at Grauman's Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood.

In 1945, the charter of the United Nations was signed by 50 countries in San Francisco.

In 1948, the Berlin Airlift began in earnest after the Soviet Union cut off land and water routes to the isolated western sector of Berlin.

In 1959, President Eisenhower joined Britain's Queen Elizabeth II in ceremonies officially opening the St. Lawrence Seaway.

In 1968, U.S. Chief Justice Earl Warren announced his intention to resign.

In 1977, 42 people were killed when a fire sent toxic smoke pouring through the Maury County Jail in Columbia, Tenn.

In 1987, Supreme Court Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. announced his retirement, leaving a vacancy that was filled by Anthony M. Kennedy.

Ten years ago: President Clinton announced the United States had launched missiles against Iraqi targets because of "compelling evidence" Iraq had plotted to assassinate former President Bush. Baseball Hall-of-Famer Roy Campanella died in Woodland Hills, Calif., at age 71.

Five years ago: The Supreme Court issued a landmark sexual harassment ruling, putting employers on notice that they can be held responsible for supervisors' misconduct even if they knew nothing about it.

One year ago: The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools was unconstitutional because of the words "under God" inserted by Congress in 1954. WorldCom Inc., the nation's No. 2 long-distance company, slid toward bankruptcy after disclosing what could be the biggest case of crooked accounting in U.S. history. The Group of Eight nations, meeting in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, announced that Russia would be made a full-fledged member of the elite group. Chinese basketball star Yao Ming was selected first overall by the Houston Rockets in the NBA draft.

Today's Birthdays: Actress Eleanor Parker is 81. Jazz musician-film composer Dave Grusin is 69. Actor Josef Sommer is 69. Singer Billy Davis Junior (The Fifth Dimension) is 63. Singer Georgie Fame is 60. Actor Clive Francis is 57. Actor Robert Davi is 49. Singer-musician Mick Jones is 48. Actor Gedde Watanabe is 48. Rock singer Chris Isaak is 47. Rock singer Patty Smyth is 46. Singer Terri Nunn (Berlin) is 42. Actor Mark McKinney is 41. Rock singer Harriet Wheeler (The Sundays) is 40. Rock musician Colin Greenwood (Radiohead) is 34. Actor Sean Hayes is 33. Actor Matt Letscher is 33. Actor Chris O'Donnell is 33. Actor-musician Jason Schwartzman is 23. Actress Kaitlin Cullum is 17.

For a life that unceasingly seems boring and unremarkable in short-term reflection, I am grateful for who I know, what I have, and the opportunities before me. If I could drink at work, I'd toast to another 23 years.

UPDATE(12:05pm)
Sweet! The Supreme Court struck down the Texas sodomy law. The only problem I have with this? It was a 6-3 decision, which means Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas have still got a lot to learn about individual freedom.

"The court has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda," Scalia wrote for the three. He took the unusual step of reading his dissent from the bench.

"The court has taken sides in the culture war," Scalia said, adding that he has "nothing against homosexuals."

UPDATE(6/27/2003 12:05am)
Strom Thurmond died...one hell of a news day.

UPDATE(6/26/2004 5:05pm)
June 26, 2004

Posted by drizzten at 08:28 AM | Permalink

Go read Anger Management. Great posts on the non-right to health care, affirmative action, and the evil of altruism. If Blogger is being a jackass, use this link and Crtl+F to search for the terms.

Posted by drizzten at 12:56 AM | Permalink

In my post about the deaths of Amy Seager's daughters due to a driver using a cell phone, Amy Seager herself posts a long comment, disagreeing with me. Give it a look-over, as well as my response right after her comments.

Posted by drizzten at 11:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Employment is a two-way street of voluntary behavior.

The Worker primarily wants compensation for his or her efforts. A regular and fair paycheck, occasionally bumped up to reflect company loyalty and increased job knowledge and effectiveness, is what most people look for during a job hunt. Some people want healthcare and retirement benefits at least as much as a strong income, but those forms of compensation usually kick in after a trial period of after certain employment goals are met. A healthy and safe work environment and enjoyable co-workers are also important to most Workers.

The Company primarily wants a workforce of motivated, productive, innovative, and pleasant people doing the work that the owners cannot do on their own. This is tempered by the economic reality that they cannot pay everyone want they want, nor would that even be appropriate since some people are better at certain tasks while others lag behind. Just as important, the Company would rather not go through employee turnover and the rehiring process as this is expensive: to get a new employee up to speed and trained properly takes time and money.

Once someone is hired, the process and conflict doesn't end there; it begins in earnest.

For example, today is my second full annual job evaluation since I started working with my current employer. My boss's and company's system of yearly evaluations goes thusly:

1. The employee has job targets assigned to him or her and is expected to work towards fullfilling them as the financial year progresses.
2. The manager of that employee notes important behavior.
3. Near the May-June part of the year, the manager sends out a blank form for the employee to fill out in order to self-evaluate his or her performance in many areas, including job target accomplishment.
4. The manager reads over the self-evaluation and includes it with one the manger makes.
5. This document is returned to the employee so he or she knows what to expect when the face-to-face formal evaluation is done.

Lately, I've reduced that problem to a handful of calls. Unfortunately, it's been replaced by not getting back to work an hour after lunch. I've been trying to save money by eating at home and fixing whatever food I have. I'm only seven or so minutes away from work, but the cooking prep and eating time forces me to rush. The end result is getting back five to ten minutes late. In the last few weeks, it's been more like ten to twenty minutes late. So she laid down the law and I've had to change my habits.

Beyond basics like attendance and tardiness, my other biggest problems are in keeping focused on work (and avoiding things like blogging and web browsing...), timely completion of tasks (this has also improved over the years), and taking the initiative in doing things to help co-workers in their tasks. Since I'm an administrative secretary and provide assistence to the other thirteen people in my division, I have to be flexible and quick and I've got some improvement to build upon.

But in the end, after I recieved my manager evaluation yesterday, I was surprised my marks had gone up and her comments were as positive as they were. My boss was able to put aside my recent problems of tardiness and take into account the larger picture of my employment and job performance and compare it to my past behavior. For that, I am grateful.

We'll see how it goes today. My face-to-face eval is scheduled for 8:30 and they usually last 45 minutes. I turn 23 tomorrow and I take off for a long vacation in Florida on Friday, so I hope the eval sets a good tone. I have some of my own things to mention during the interview, so it should be interesting.

UPDATE(6:40pm)
It went well and as good as I could expect it. Continuous improvement since Day One.

Posted by drizzten at 07:12 AM | Permalink

At least according to John Kerry

Kerry also took questions from the audience; the last came from a glamorous young woman wearing a low-cut white dress who wanted to know how he felt about the charge—levelled by Dean, among others—that he was too similar to Bush to lead the Democrats. “The Bush Administration agenda isn’t conservative Republicanism, and it’s not radical Republicanism—it’s extreme libertarianism,” he replied. “We certainly don’t need another Republican Party.” The woman, a Columbia student named Meredith, had been at Downtown Dean, too.

This single statement says one of two things. Either John Kerry is utterly ignorant of libertarianism and Bush's acts and policies or he is deliberately lying in order to score points with the crowd...and anyone with a high school degree of political knowledge should know his statement is complete bullshit. Whichever it may be, he gets my award for Most Blatant Political Exaggeration of 2003. Fuck man, Bush isn't even a hard rightist or staunch conservative (he pussies out too often and comprimises too regularly to sit on that wing of the spectrum)...it's almost as ridiculous as saying Democrats are the party of personal liberty.

Via Hit & Run.

Posted by drizzten at 05:40 PM | Permalink

You can view the bills Rick Perry signed into law by legislative body: the House and the Senate. For even more fun, spend some time viewing the Concurrent Resolutions from both bodies Mr. Perry signed. On a potentially brighter note, the list of vetoed bills is also available. Then we get to the Lazy Ass/Political Wussy section where we see the list of bills allowed to become law because Perry did nothing about them.

The Machine rolls on.

Posted by drizzten at 05:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Furi Kuri (or Fooly Cooly) has been my favorite anime for a little over a year. It may only be six episodes long, but those few episodes do more for me than most series' 26. The music is awesome (competing directly with Trigun and Cowboy Bebop for best anime music, IMHO), the imagery and direction often breathtaking, and the voice acting (both Japanese and English) is excellent. I've got the first two DVDs and pre-ordered the third which should come with a box.

Now I hear there is a distinct possibility FLCL may be shown on Cartoon Network's Adult Swim.

Production IG Announcements and News
Representative: Maki Terashima

Announcement: FLCL has been sold to a network. It will air before fall this year. The announcement should be sometime next week. People were asking which network, but she did not indicate one way or the other. There are strong indications that the network will be Cartoon Network and that FLCL will air in the Adult Swim segment.

Production I.G stated at Fanime this past weekend that broadcast rights to FLCL had been sold, but they did not state to which broadcaster. Last night the following interstitial appeared on Cartoon Network during Adult Swim, "A new anime is coming your way. It's only six episodes long. But it's shockingly great. Like Bebop, Big O and Beef Logs." They did not say FLCL, but the assumption is reasonable.

Even better, there aren't many scenes worthy of editing or cutting in order to tailor it for broadcast cable. Even the "worst" scenes (there's no nudity, only the lightest of swearing, and nosebleed-level blood) could be cut and the show would remain intact and very watchable. I'm all for this.

UPDATE(7/23/2003 6:30pm)
Now that I have the final DVD, I can say with confidence there is no "nudity" in the anime. The only two scenes that might have posed a problem (Haruko's ass in Ep5 and the blurred parts of Kamon's crotch in Ep6) in the past certainly won't today, especially if the anime is aired in Adult Swim block.

UPDATE(7/30/2003 12:10am)
Possible bad news and the first promo download of FLCL on Adult Swim.

UPDATE(8/6/2003 7:25am)
Looks like there were no edits to the first episode. *thumbs up*

UPDATE(8/11/2003 noon)
Removed the direct link to the promo episode download.

UPDATE(8/13/2003 8:15am)
Kyle Pope indicates the lack of edits in episodes 2-4, beyond taking out a "shit!" from Haruko in episode 2.

UPDATE(9/1/2003 2pm)
Check out this crap

Have you watched The Cartoon Network with your children lately? If you haven't, and you are a parent or advocate for children, you should read this.

There is a new cartoon called "FLCL," or "Fooly Cooly." Originating from Japan, this cartoon airs at midnight on The Cartoon Network as part of the network's evening programming called "Adult Swim."

My husband heard about "FLCL" from some young men in their 20s who found it quite entertaining and told my husband to watch it sometime. When my husband and I turned on "FLCL," we were shocked and outraged.

[...]

Had this program been on a channel other than The Cartoon Network and had it been rated "R," we would not have been so alarmed. This program is rated TV-PG. What we saw was nudity below the waist on a teenage girl, kids blowing people's brains out with machine guns, extreme violence and sexual content - all being acted out by adolescent characters. Why has this show been rated TV-PG?

[...]

When we tried to contact The Cartoon Network, we found that it does not accept phone comments from viewers. We went to its Web site, cartooncomments@ turner.com, and did not find a place to contact anyone at the network. We will, however, mail it a copy of this letter.

We have been in contact with the Federal Communications Commission, the ACLU and organizations dealing with violence against children. We have been spreading the word to educators and churches to raise public awareness about this incorrect rating.

Posted by drizzten at 07:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (93)

We are all equals.

However, some people are more equal than others.

Thanks to the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision (PDF) in the University of Michigan Grutter v. Bollinger case, we're stuck with "affirmative action" for another generation. My opinions on this form of deliberate institutional racism are here and here.

Posted by drizzten at 12:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (11)

Officer Muñiz has commented in my previous entry regarding Jamie Lichtenwalter's attack on four police officers.

Posted by drizzten at 12:31 AM | Permalink

I'm somewhat anal about time and tracking it. This may be partly due to my tardiness to various things and slowly running out of excuses to cover my ass. I've been wearing wristwatches continuously for over twelve years, stretching back into my final days in elementary school. I liked and still like knowing what time it is.

I've only wanted one kind of watch. It must be reasonably water resistent, a day/date stamp, have backlighting, a stopwatch/lap timer, an alarm, and a way to choose multiple time zones if you travel. Living on military bases for 18 years exposed me to the watches AAFES carries, which were overwhelmingly Timex. I can't remember the models of my first few watches, but I've worn my current one for over eight years. It's a Timex Atlantis 100 and though the picture of the watch's face in the link doesn't directly match my watches face, they are similar enough for informational purposes.

I've never changed a battery, never had it fixed, and never once questioned it's reliability. It is possibly the most steadfast and dependable piece of electronics I've ever owned.

However, the watch band is made from plastic. After being exposed to thousands of sunny days, hundreds of gallons of treated pool water, dozens of hours of submersal in the Pacific Ocean, tens of thousands of showers and baths from upwards of five different states, and even a few dips in the Gulf of Mexico...the band has become brittle and lost all of it's flexibility. You could jab someone with the damn thing and bruise them. It is molded unyieldingly to my wrist.

Perhaps if I haven't developed the habit of taking the watch off a few times a year to smooth out the arm hair and to give the skin a few minutes watch-contact-free, I might have squeezed another three or four hundred problem-free days out of it. But the band gave way a few weeks ago, developing two weak spots where the band must be put under pressure in order to take the watch off. One of those spots creased even further a few days ago and now I'm looking at the first physical defect in my Timex: the last inch and a half of the band that slides through the metal buckle has snapped off.

I could buy a replacement band. The direct replacement is another black plastic band. I know how well they work. In the past, I tried watches with nylon or leather bands, but they collect and retain sweat and eventually they being to smell bad. Perhaps it's just me, because I see lots of guys with those kinds of bands on their arm, but it is bothersome. Going with a metal band has never been appealing. They tend to pinch my wrist hairs, are too flashy for my tastes, and dont stay in one place on my arm. And I'm not shaving my wrist for a watch, toning up my tastes, or be willing to put up with a watch that slides all over my lower arm. I'm picky, dammit. :)

I trust Timex and their watches, but most of their newer styles are too slick and organic for me. They look like they belong on a track or in the Olympics. My needs are more modest. And inexpensive.

I've been looking at the face of this watch for the better part of a decade. Not to get too weepy or sentimental, but it's the one thing that's been with me throughout the highest and lowest points in my life. The face is familiar and comforting. And scratched all to hell. The case is beat up; the aesthetic-minded plastic and paint slowly eroded until the underlying plastic foundation was revealed, some many unknowable moons ago. It's a watch with character and grit pressed upon it by the things I've done.

Whatever happens and whatever I choose to do, it will take just as long to foster a similar level of attachment to my next wrist-based timepiece.

Posted by drizzten at 12:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Austin native Scott McClellan named presidential press secretary

President Bush on Friday named Austin native Scott McClellan, son of Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, to one of the most stressful and influential jobs in Washington — presidential press secretary.

[...]

McClellan, 35, is a graduate of Austin High and the University of Texas. He learned politics at the knee of his mother, a school board member, Austin mayor, state railroad commissioner and now comptroller. McClellan grew up in the back room of the City Council chambers and remembers, as a third-grader, speaking into a car-mounted public address system to implore listeners to "please vote for my mother."

He ran three of his mother's statewide campaigns, gaining a deep understanding of Texas politics. Now he moves into a job that demands a strong working knowledge of foreign affairs, national politics and congressional activity — facing a daily barrage of questions on all three topics by an aggressive and information-hungry press corps.

Posted by drizzten at 05:08 PM | Permalink

[Updates below.]

If it turns out Bush either lied, inflated the value of, or otherwise misled us about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, then I'd want him and the administration officials who were involved in the political process leading up to the war to resign. I think it's highly unlikely there are none in Iraq and only slightly less likey there are only a handful of meager labs and experiments. However, I am chastened to admit a large portion of my support for the war was based upon the evidence and statements put forth by Bush, Powell, Rumsfeld, and everyone else in the American government. I don't enjoy putting that much trust in an institution I greatly dislike. I would be furious if they abused that trust.

I'm thoroughly sick of the drip-drip hypocritical poison Republicans are excreting in regards to their "support" for limited government, individual liberty, and free market solutions to the nation's problems. We've suffered through Trent Lott, Rick Santorum, and now Orrin Hatch. We've been handed economic dogshit in the form of the 2002 Farm Bill, steel tariffs, Canadian wheat tariffs, tariffs on Korean chipmakers, and utterly no useful action on fixing Social Security.

I once nearly voted straight-ticket Republican. I will never make the mistake of entertaining that notion again.

UPDATE(11/30/2003 11:13pm)
Looks like Bush will be dropping the steel tariffs sometime this week. Good move, but too bad it had to be made at all.

The Bush administration has decided to repeal its 20-month-old tariffs on imported steel to head off a trade war that would have included foreign retaliation against products from politically crucial states, administration and industry sources said yesterday.

The officials would not say when President Bush will announce the decision but said it is likely to be this week. The officials said they had to allow for the possibility that he would make some change in the plan, but a source close to the White House said it was "all but set in stone."

© 2003 The Washington Post Company

UPDATE(6/18/2004 5:11pm)
Whom to Vote For?

Posted by drizzten at 11:54 AM | Permalink

The Difference Between Liberals And Conservatives.

Straightforward, eh? 'tis the best way. Force and compulsion versus choice and opportunity. At least, that's what it's supposed to be...the server hosting this site would buckle under the weight of the hard drives necessary to store all the contradictions and exceptions to this. In the end, however, Grimthing's post does highlight a fundamental fork in philosophy.

Posted by drizzten at 01:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Terror strikes at open meetings

A cloud of secrecy could block the sunshine of open government if officials invoke the threat of terrorism as an excuse to close meetings and keep documents private.

Recently passed legislation gives government officials broad powers to keep records secret and close meetings so long as terrorism or related criminal activity is at issue. Gov. Rick Perry has until Sunday to sign or veto the legislation, or let it go into law without his signature.

I should have expected this to happen eventually.

Mostly at issue is a series of provisions in the state homeland security bill. So long as the threat of terrorism is invoked, government officials would have the power to keep secret any information, other than financial, associated with terrorism.

Under the pending law, risk assessment studies by power plant owners or bridge builders given to the government are private. University research on biological or chemical weapons as well as conventional weapons is off-limits.

Any security systems, including the location of cameras, don’t have to be disclosed. And any government body meeting to discuss a terrorist threat or crisis can meet in secret if the meeting is taped to be later reviewed by a judge if a protest is lodged.

Posted by drizzten at 06:41 PM | Permalink

Via Drudge, a story of a girl who wanted to run a lemonade stand, the City of Naples, and a temporary business permit.

A six-year-old girl was heartbroken when her small lemonade stand was put out of business because she didn’t have a temporary business permit. A neighbor called the police and her stand was shut down.

[...]

Even though she’s only 6 years old, Abagail prepares for another day at work.

"We like making money at our lemonade stand. We want it to stay cold so they can have cold lemonade on hot days,” she said.

A young entrepreneur who does the cleaning even the advertising. And it is paying off.

"We are making lots of tips in our tip jar,” said Abagail.

But a few days ago, Abagail and her friends were put out of business by a neighbor.

"We didn't have a permit so she called the cops,” said Abagail.

The police arrived and shut her down.

"We had to take down our lemonade stand,” said Abagail.

Abagail did not have a temporary business permit, which is technically a city violation.

"I was kind of shocked because I didn't know we needed a permit for 6 year old girls to sell lemonade,” said K.C. Shaw, Abagail’s mom.

According to the city, they have to act on a formal complaint.

"Normally we don't get involved in it but once we do get a formal request we must take action,” said Al Hogrefe of the city of Naples.

So Abagail’s mom went to the city code enforcement office with wallet in hand, prepared to buy a permit.

"$35 every single time for a single use,” said Shaw.

Not wanting to be sour, the city played Mr. Niceguy.

"No we did not charge her, no,” said Hogrefe.

They did finally get the permit.

"Basically a blank check to have as many lemonade stands as we can stand,” said Shaw.

It's not like she's doing this thing full-time and making any real money, is it?

It would be funny, though. Funny, if she choose to continue to run her business in front of her house whenever she could. Funny, if her lemonade began to actually catch on due to some new technique or material she uses. Funny, if it developed over time to be a serious source of pride and experience, turning into the direct joy of entrepreneurship.

Funny, if the City one day asked her to pay the license fee or even go full-tilt and require her to apply for a permanent permit/license. Of course, it's highly unlikely they'd ask for the latter application: I doubt the City allows permanent business to be held in residentially-zoned areas. I also highly doubt local, state, and federal employment laws would allow such a young girl to work many hours, if at all. Doing so might put her parents in a position liable for child endagerment and improper child labor. We can't forget mandated reporting forms for the IRS. They've got to be filled out by someone who knows what they're doing. Then there is the chance that Abagail's success earns the attention of the politically well-connected citrus industry.

Good thing the self-employed aren't covered by OHSA - that might really put a cold wash on the idea! HA! HA!

Funny.

So Abagail is back in business and learned laws can be tough, even for a six year old's lemonade stand.

Shaw said the police officers who shut down the stand felt terrible, but they had to do their job. One of the officers even bought a glass of lemonade from Abagail.

UPDATE(6/21/2003)
The publicity has had an effect. But the fundamental irrationality still exists.

It was only nine days ago that Avigayil was known to passers-by as the cute girl who sells plastic cups of lemonade for 50 cents in front of her Old Naples house. Today, she's known as the Naples lemonade gal who has the whole country rooting for her and her ambitious little lemonade stand.

It turns out not many folks knew someone needs a city permit to operate a lemonade stand. Even Naples Mayor Bonnie MacKenzie bought lemonade from the small setup before Avigayil was forced to close it.

"I've been a customer of hers more than once," MacKenzie said. "That means I've aided and abetted. You know what, I'm not one bit sorry. It's good lemonade."

Although the Naples police officer who answered the call was only doing his job, he felt so bad he bought a cup of lemonade. City officials shook their heads in shame. So they waived the permit fee, which was $35.

After a temporary shutdown, the city allowed the business entrepreneur to reopen.

[...]

"One guy was yelling, 'are you proud of what the nation thinks of your city?'" city staffer Michael Moose said. "It's pretty bizarre."

Naples police Chief Steven Moore said the city police department has received several calls, including one at 4 a.m. Friday from a man asking if officers had anything better to do than to shut down a lemonade stand. Others called irate, claiming they heard the police took Avigayil to jail.

"It's taken on a life of its own," Moore said with a smile.

Avigayil says she's famous. But she doesn't realize how many people know about her. She bases fame on how many coins and dollar bills are in her tip jar — a glass vase with a sign taped across it letting customers know spare change can be tossed inside.

Since news of the lemonade stand began spreading earlier this week, she expects to be "famous" for a long time.

"It makes you get lots and lots of money," Avigayil said, while holding her tip jar. "It's really fun."

This opinion piece gets it.

UPDATE(9/12/2003 12:40am)
More here. A lot more.

Posted by drizzten at 01:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Amidst the lefty statism, there is something worth thinking about in his Benefit News article.

What are employers thinking? There is no health care crisis

According to a study by Hewitt Associates, 82% of employers plan to increase retiree premiums, 76% will increase cost-sharing, and 25% will shift to a defined contribution approach.

All of which inspires this question: What are employers thinking? Let's be clear: There is no health care crisis in America.

The fact is that the vast majority of Americans obtain health care when needed and the majority is satisfied with the system.

If there is anything wrong with the health care system it is caused by...well, us.

[...]

It is striking how shortsighted and strategically ill informed most employers are. I receive e-mails regularly from employees worried about the security of their benefits, primarily pension and health benefits. They read about companies eliminating retiree medical, making benefits employee-pay-all and they wonder about their future. The idea that the "promises" of the past may not be secure is mind boggling to many workers who have counted on this security...and why not?

Employers were happy to build the entitlement mentality when it suited their needs, were happy to encourage company loyalty and to provide high level first-dollar benefits when things were good. In tough times, however, it seems health care costs have become the rallying cry for cost-cutting.

However, it is well-established that labor costs are responsible for the largest chunk of business operation costs. A huge portion of that is due to non-salary benefits such as medical coverage, pensions, retirement plans, etc. It is a logical place to cut costs and save money...

We benefit managers talk about the brilliant ideas we have to control costs as if they only affect some invisible group of people and as if we are on a mission to save the world from health care costs. In the process we may be disaffecting the very work force our companies will need in order to be successful in the future. At the very least we are providing significant distractions for our current workers, the ones we desperately need to leverage for the success of our organizations. What are we thinking?

Medical is the number-one benefit. Individuals will join a company because of its health benefits and will stay with a company because of the health benefits. When competition for workers is strong, health benefits can tip the scale. But it appears that when labor is plentiful these benefits can go by the wayside. How shortsighted on the employers' part. Smart companies will use the value of health benefits to prudently make their organizations an attractive place to work. People who have good memories and loyalty will be out the window for a long time when a company plays with its workers' security for short-term gain.

He continues with an even more important point:

Defined benefit pensions have been replaced with defined contribution plans as the primary retirement vehicle (if the worker has any vehicle). According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), about 41% of retirees 55 and older have pension income from their former employer and only 36% of retirees age 65 or older have such benefits. Cash balance conversions from the old DB plan save an employer money and give workers a warm and comfortable feeling in the process.

[...]

Seniors comprise the fastest growing segment of the population. Seniors are typically retired workers, and when they are retired they are consumers of all kinds of goods and services. That is, if they have income to make those purchases. The average monthly income for a retiree age 55-64 is about $1,300 and the amount declines with age. The average retiree today has a total of $15,000 in financial assets. So, are employers as smart as they think? Today we are helping to establish a new generation of retirees with less retirement income and much of it based on what they can save.

While we are talking about saving, let's talk about the other saving for retirement. Of course, we know about saving for retirement income. Generally speaking, people don't. But there is another savings objective people ignore as well: According to EBRI, only about one-third of workers at firms with 1,000 or more employees still have retiree medical from their employer. Workers in smaller firms are even worse off. If future retirees lack employer-provided retiree medical, how will they pay for it? By saving of course.

EBRI has done several projections of the savings needed for a retiree to pay for health benefits. For example, for a person to pay for premiums and out of pocket costs only between ages 55 and 64, starting in 2003 and assuming they have access to employer-based coverage, they will need between $75,000 and $94,000. Oh yes, if you want coverage for your spouse as well, double those numbers. And, add another $80,000 to $117,000 per person for coverage supplementing Medicare if you plan on living only to age 80.

We are helping to make a new generation more dependent on government programs. We are making it virtually impossible for a person to retire before achieving Medicare eligibility because they will not have employerbased health benefits (and they will be more dependent on Social Security income generally not available before age 66). It is estimated that 88% of today's workforce will not have access to retiree medical benefits. We are placing more strain on Social Security and Medicare, two other crises that do not exist as evidenced by our largely ignoring both.

Though Mr. Quinn's solution is "a long-term strategy that allows fair cost sharing, a meaningful commitment workers can count on and a strategy to provide health care benefits not merely based on the latest trend and knee-jerk reaction to costs. It requires employers working together - in teams, like workers are told to do."

I'd add that beyond business innovation and collaboration, we must eliminate the benefits the government attempts to provide. It would accomplish two worthwhile things, among others:

[Updates below.]

Erik recently dealt with a comment left on a previous post about a letter he read in a (I'm assuming) San Antonio newspaper about a smoking ban or restriction.

Baer (the commenter) said:

People who smoke don't have the right to put other people's health at risk just so they can enjoy themselves.
I don't think its too much to ask that smokers refrain from puffing away whilst on buses, at bustops or on trains etc. Nor do I think its wrong to expect to be able to visit a so-called local family pub or restaurant and be able to eat in a smoke-free environment.
I have no problem with smoking - go ahead damage your own health as much as you want. But don't go thinking that gives you the right to inflict it on other people.
Asthma attacks can kill - just because you wouldn't be held legally to blame for triggering an attack doesn't remove the moral accountability.
Besides which - anyone who can't go more than 10 minutes without lighting up needs to seriously rethink their lifestyle.

By the nature of rights, there can be no such thing as collective rights: in the sense of rights, deriving from membership of a group, that supersede or negate an individual's rights. Rights derive from our nature as rational beings: and we are both rational and beings, which is to say, individuals. As rational beings, we have no choice but to live by the judgment and decisions of our own minds. Even if the only decision you ever make is to blindly follow some guru, that is the decision you made, that is the course you chose for your life, and is a choice you keep making every day of your life. It is the individual who must decide -- the individual who must think -- the individual who must be free from coercion -- the individual who has rights.

Whatever group you may belong to, it is a group of individuals. Whatever virtues that group might claim, you cannot claim them unless you, as an individual, possess them. Whatever vices they might be accused of, you cannot be guilty of them unless you have committed or abetted them. Whatever values that group might seek, you have no right to them unless you have earned them.

Thus, there cannot be collective rights such as "women's rights", "men's rights", "Aboriginal rights" or "blondes' rights". You cannot have more, or less, rights than anyone else. Any such claim is simply this: because I belong to some group, I have a right to take a value I haven't earned from someone else who has, by force.

It makes no sense to say the Group is more important than the Individual because in order to enforce the 'rights' of the former, you must first violate the rights of the latter. However, any individual can be rationally classified into any number of groups, meaning that violating an individual's rights ALSO violates some groups' "rights."

Why? Well, the group Nonsmoker cannot get lung cancer...but Baer and each discreet person who inhales smoke certainly can. Organizations that try to enforce their vision of collective rights do this in the interest of each person in and supporting the organization. They may try to spin it otherwise, but they are actually defending what individuals feel is a right.

This is obviously a contradiction. But don't try telling it to them. They aren't listening. To them, "public health" is an autonomous unit and the people who make it up must sacrifice in order to maintain it.

UPDATE(10/15/2003 2:02am)
Good news: the Austin Smoking Task Force Report is in and it's definitely worth your read.

UPDATE(6/1/2004 11:05am)
Austin Smoking Ban in Effect Today

UPDATED 5/9/2005 9:03am
The Additional Tyranny - The New Austin Smoking Ban Passes

UPDATED 8/30/2005 1:52pm
Deadline for the Austin Smoking Ordinance

UPDATED 7/24/2006 11:22pm
The Group Rights Fallacy

Posted by drizzten at 01:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

Sitting back and watching the UK getting sucked into the 'EU Machine' is like sitting back and watching someone you like commit suicide...

Posted by drizzten at 11:41 PM | Permalink

Glenn Reynolds says, "At any rate, I think the politics of this stuff are likely to play out in interesting and unpredictable ways...I don't claim to really understand this phenomenon, though, and I don't think that anyone really does" of this article's topic: Down and Out in White-Collar America.

So what's keeping people like Hill and Thompson from finding jobs? The rudderless recovery and economic uncertainty deserve much of the blame. But it's bigger than that. Increasingly, supereducated and highly paid workers are finding themselves traveling the same road their blue-collar peers took in the late '80s. Then, hardhats in places like Flint, Mich., and Pittsburgh were suffering from the triple threat of computerization, tech-led productivity gains, and the relocation of their jobs to offshore sites. Machines--or low-wage foreigners--could just as easily do their work.

The white-collar crowd was concerned, but they knew that those three forces would also help get the American economy humming. And they did. Now that trust has come back to haunt them. Technology has allowed companies to handle rising sales without adding manpower. Gains in productivity mean one white-collar worker can do the work that would have taken two or three of his peers to do ten years ago. All that has led to slower wage growth. Back in 2000 wages for professional and technical workers were growing by nearly 5% annually--today they're rising by less than 2% a year.

The scariest blue-collar parallel, however, is only just beginning to be felt in the white-collar world: overseas competition. Like automakers that moved production from Michigan to Mexico or textile firms that abandoned the Southeast for the Far East, service firms are now shifting jobs to cheaper locales like India and the Philippines. It's not just call centers anymore. Indian radiologists now analyze CT scans and chest X-rays for American patients in an office park in Bangalore, not far from where Ernst & Young has 200 accountants processing U.S. tax returns. E&Y's tax prep center in India is only 18 months old, but the company already has plans to double its size. Corporate America is quickly learning that a cubicle can be replicated overseas as easily as a shop floor can.

1. This trend won't reverse unless dramatic anti-capitalist forces turn back the reforms occuring in these "offshoring" countries. I don't see this happening because the work can only bring good benefits to the people and the country.
2. The trend also won't reverse unless the considerable pressure for American businesses to cut labor costs is eased. Even in the best of economic times, I couldn't see this happening to any non-trivial degree. When the savings can approach 50% or more, it is a powerful economic incentive to move seats out of the country.
3. This will politically energize the managerial and specialist classes and drive up voter participation rates if labor policy becomes a major political issue. Just as in the blue-collar labor disputes, the majority of the white-collar electorate will want trade controls to protect American jobs. Something like limits on the number or percentage of foreign-based workers (at first, only in certain fields) a company can employ.
4. Given the wealth in this class of people, politicians will take notice as the voting power is added to the potential donation power. I strongly doubt it would be a partisan issue; no American wants to lose his or her job for a long time and that cuts across political lines. Republicans would stump for regulations under patriotic, nationalist, and (short-sighted) economic banners. Democrats would stump for regulations under labor equity reasons. Libertarians and capitalists will do whatever they can to remind everyone that this is how markets work and to fight them would be worse than doing nothing. The Left will laugh and waggle fingers about how this sudden concern was missing from this class during massive labor shifts in the blue-collar class in the past and of course the government is allowed or even supposed to intervene to save the day.
5. Indian, Chinese, Bangladeshi, Indonesian, Russian, and Filipino culture will exchange with American at a much higher rate. Ties among these countries will tighten with the additional trade and market-sharing. With greater free market ties, liberty will also spread, likely pushing these nations towards more social, political, and economic freedoms.
6. Once larger parts of the "Third World" (a term that will be met with ever-increasing cynicism in the future) are relieved of the number one pressure to move to American (economic reasons), immigration should slowly drop from those countries even though there will be much greater international travel among them. It may take a while, but a possible long-term outcome of this is an accelerated rate of black and hispanic population percentage as they slowly erode the majority caucasians have in raw numbers.
7. It will place more upward pressure on demand for bi- or multilingual Americans.
8. The efficiencies enjoyed by the businesses doing this will result in better short-term (say, 5-10 years) profitibility, but will inevitably result in even higher competition as more and more companies outsource their labor. Consumers benefit even though it's likely that by this time, the United States will have been taken down a few economic notches by the relative gains by these other nations. Our economic superiority cannot last forever and certainly not when our labor market is considerably more expensive than others.

Posted by drizzten at 01:03 AM | Permalink

These are your father's toons

It's a pretty good article about the preponderance of cartoons these days on TV and the increasing presence they bring. It also deals with Cartoon Network's dominance and the reasons it grew to the size it's at currently.

Surprised that adults are gravitating toward the toons, even the ones that got canned? You probably shouldn't be, considering the longest-running sitcom on television will soon be "The Simpsons." And not while "South Park's" Cartman says things that, even now, manage to curl your mother's hair in completely new ways.

Mike Lazzo, senior vice president of programming over "Adult Swim," always knew toons weren't just for kids. "From the very beginning when Cartoon Network started getting ratings, a third of our audience was 13 or older," he said. "We'd historically bring in an older audience in a number of ways — parents watching with kids, nostalgia, animation freaks — but didn't have the resources to cater to them."

While other networks have geared cartoons toward older audiences, including MTV with shows like "Daria" and "Beavis and Butt-head," few have stuck with it as long as Cartoon Network. What began modestly with the 1994 launch of "Space Ghost: Coast to Coast," a late-night offering that was part live-action, part crude animation, has since extended throughout Cartoon Network's programming. Though "Adult Swim," which mixes comedy and anime (Japanese animation) action shows in its Sunday through Thursday night blocks, is specifically for mature audiences, shows such as "Samurai Jack," "Dexter's Laboratory" and "Powerpuff Girls" have built the channel's viewership far beyond its 2- to 11-year-old core audience.

As a result of its success, on top of "The Simpsons" and "South Park," cartoons are now aggressively popping up all over cable.

Posted by drizzten at 02:21 PM | Permalink

From the Lew Rockwell blog, a story about as plain as one can get to demonstrate the nature of the individual versus the state.

A legal battle over two home-schooled children exploded into a seven-hour standoff yesterday, when they refused to take a standardized test ordered by the Department of Social Services.

George Nicholas Bryant, 15, and Nyssa Bryant, 13, stood behind their parents, Kim and George, as police and DSS workers attempted to collect the children at 7:45 a.m. DSS demanded that the two complete a test to determine their educational level.

[...]

The second refusal came after an emotion-filled morning for the family, when DSS workers sternly demanded the Bryants comply with their orders.

"We have legal custody of the children and we will do with them as we see fit," DSS worker Susan Etscovitz told the Bryants in their Gale Street home. "They are minors and they do what we tell them to do."

Four police officers were also at the scene and attempted to coax the Bryants to listen to the DSS worker.

"We are simply here to prevent a breach of the peace," said Waltham Youth Officer Detective James Auld. "We will will not physically remove the children."

Wanna know why the state thinks it owns the children?

Both sides agree that the children are in no way abused mentally, physically, sexually or emotionally, but legal custody of the children was taken from Kim and George Bryant in December 2001. The children will remain under the legal custody of DSS until their 16th birthdays.

The parents have been ruled as unfit because they did not file educational plans or determine a grading system for the children, two criteria of Waltham Public School's home schooling policy.

Posted by drizzten at 12:21 PM | Permalink

U.S. Troops May Have to Go After Hamas, Lawmaker

A leading Republican lawmaker said on Sunday U.S. forces may have to help "root out terrorism" in the Middle East conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, including taking aim at Hamas.

In an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Sen. Richard Lugar, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said American forces might be part of an international force to help stop attacks by Hamas, the main group behind a campaign of suicide bombings against Israelis, and other groups.

However, if there was one thing we could do to really piss off Islamics and Arabs, it would be to get directly involved in the military effort against Palestinian terrorists.

Lugar said such a force could be used to quell Israeli and Palestinian disputes, "and, maybe even more important, to root out the terrorism that is at the heart of the problem."

Asked if that meant such troops would go after Hamas or other groups, he said, "That may be the conclusion."

Whether to insert forces into the volatile situation is being considered, including "whether they are to be all by themselves" or in conjunction with a United Nations or NATO force, he said.

"That is always a possibility but having said that, I would just say this is down the trail. We have to be very, very careful about the use of American forces," he said.

I see no compelling reason to get directly involved in Israel like this. Not when we have the problem of Principles vs. Diplomacy: as long as people have things they are unwilling to give up and an opposing force demands that to happen, there will be violence in Israel.

Add America to this and (as opposed to the predictions of some regarding possible outcomes in Afghanistan and Iraq) very likely drive the supply of terrorists upwards as well as their anti-American motivations. It would increase (and not just in the short-term) the threat at home and abroad.

International policy should be, first and foremost, about securing the safety of life and property of Americans both at home and overseas. I cannot see how this idea would accomplish this. I don't accept the notion that we "must remain active in [the] Mideast peace process" simply on the idea that Israel's ability to fight depends on the resources America sells and gives the country.

Senator Lugar is too ready to use American force and treasure abroad.

Posted by drizzten at 11:58 AM | Permalink

Tacitus, after reading Pandagon, points to something depressing:

Such is the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan, compounded by the return to the country of a large number of former Afghan communist refugees, that United States and Pakistani intelligence officials have met with Taliban leaders in an effort to devise a political solution to prevent the country from being further ripped apart.

According to a Pakistani jihadi leader who played a role in setting up the communication, the meeting took place recently between representatives of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the US Federal Bureau of Investigation and Taliban leaders at the Pakistan Air Force base of Samungli, near Quetta.

Posted by drizzten at 11:14 AM | Permalink

From e-mail circulation:

HOW TO SING THE BLUES... A PRIMER

1. Most Blues begin, "Woke up this morning ..."
2. "I got a good woman" is a bad way to begin the Blues, unless you stick something nasty in the next line like, "I got a good woman, with the meanest face in town."
3. The Blues is simple. After you get the first line right, repeat it. Then find something that rhymes...sort of: "Got a good woman with the meanest face in town. Yeah, I got a good woman with the meanest face in town. Got teeth like Margaret Thatcher, and she weigh 500 pound."
4. The Blues is not about choice. You stuck in a ditch, you stuck in a ditch--ain't no way out.
5. Blues cars: Chevys, Fords, Cadillacs, and broken-down trucks. Blues don't travel in Volvos, BMWs, or Sport Utility Vehicles. Most Blues transportation is a Greyhound bus or a southbound train; blues NEVER go on the northbound train. Jet aircraft and state-sponsored motor pools ain't even in the running. Walkin' plays a major part in the blues lifestyle. So does fixin' to die.
6. Teenagers can't sing the Blues. They ain't fixin' to die yet. Adults sing the Blues. In Blues, "adulthood" means being old enough to get the electric chair if you shoot a man in Memphis.
7. Blues can take place in New York City but not in Hawaii or any place in Canada. Hard times in Minneapolis or Seattle is probably just clinical depression. Chicago, St. Louis, Memphis, and Kansas City are still the best places to have the Blues. You cannot have the blues in any place that don't get rain.
8. A man with male pattern baldness ain't the blues. A woman with male pattern baldness is. Breaking your leg cause you were skiing is not the blues. Breaking your leg 'cause a alligator be chomping on it is.
9. You can't have no Blues in a office or a shopping mall. The lighting is wrong. Go outside to the parking lot or sit by the dumpster.
10. Good places for the Blues:
    1. highway
    2. jailhouse
    3. empty bed
    4. bottom of a whiskey glass
    Places where Blues ain't happening:
    1. Nordstrom's
    2. gallery openings
    3. Ivy League institutions
    4. golf courses
11. No one will believe it's the Blues if you wear a suit, 'less you happen to be an old person, and you slept in it for the last 6 months.
12. Do you have the right to sing the Blues? Yes, if:
    1. you older than dirt
    2. you blind
    3. you shot a man in Memphis
    4. you can't be satisfied
    Not if:
    1. you have all your teeth
    2. you were once blind but now can see
    3. the man in Memphis lived
    4. you have a 401K or trust fund
13. Blues is not a matter of color. It's a matter of bad luck. Tiger Woods cannot sing the blues. Sonny Liston could. Ugly white people also got a leg up on the blues.
14. If you ask for water and your darlin' give you gasoline, it's the Blues. Other acceptable Blues beverages are:
    1. cheap wine
    2. whiskey or bourbon
    3. muddy water
    4. nasty, old, burned, black coffee
    The following are NOT Blues beverages:
    1. Perrier
    2. Chardonnay
    3. Snapple
    4. Slim Fast
15. If death occurs in a cheap motel or a shotgun shack, it's a Blues death. Stabbed in the back by a jealous lover is another Blues way to die. So is the electric chair, substance abuse, and dying lonely on a broken down cot. You can't have a Blues death if you die during a tennis match or while getting liposuction.
16. Some Blues names for women:
    1. Sadie
    2. Big Mama
    3. Bessie
    4. Fat River Dumpling
17. Some Blues names for men:
    1. Joe
    2. Willie
    3. Little Willie
    4. Big Willie
18. Persons with names like Michelle, Amber, Debbie, and Heather can't sing the Blues no matter how many men they shoot in Memphis.
19. Make-Your-Own-Blues-Name Starter Kit:
    1. name of physical infirmity (Blind, Cripple, Lame, etc.)
    2. first name (see above) plus name of fruit (Lemon, Lime, Kiwi, etc.)
    3. last name of President (Jefferson, Johnson, Fillmore, etc.)
    For example: Blind Lime Jefferson, Jakeleg Lemon Johnson or Cripple Kiwi Fillmore, etc. (Well, maybe not "Kiwi.")
20. I don't care how tragic your life: If you own even one computer, you cannot sing the blues.

Posted by drizzten at 11:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Anti-Tax Crusaders Work for Big Shift

After the third tax cut in three years, some Bush administration policymakers are pushing for more fundamental changes that would largely shelter investments from taxation, dramatically changing the way Americans are taxed and how the government is financed.

But they are running into surprising opposition from White House officials who fear that such prescriptions could have dangerous economic and political consequences as the budget deficit grows.

Conservatives are beginning to realize how bad the statism is under Bush (even though it's probably better than it would have been under Gore). I hope Bush remembers those words when he hears proposals like the ones mentioned in the article.

Last year, Ernest S. Christian, a Treasury official in the Reagan administration and founder of the Committee for Strategic Tax Reform, devised a plan for stealth tax reform in "five easy pieces."

Placed against the tax cuts of the past three years, Christian's agenda is beginning to look like a road map: lower marginal income tax rates, including capital gains tax rates; eliminate taxes on dividends; accelerate the speed with which businesses can write investment expenses off their tax bills; expand the Roth individual retirement account to all personal saving; and exclude export and other foreign trade income of American companies from taxation.

The first piece, lower rates, has now been accomplished in dramatic fashion. The top income tax rate of 39.6 percent in 2001 has now fallen to 35 percent, while the tax rate on most capital gains has fallen from 20 to 15 percent. A substantial leap toward completion of the second piece was taken when taxes on corporate dividends were cut last month from a top rate of 38.6 percent to 15 percent for most dividends, and 5 percent for others. A year ago, the concept of the "double taxation of corporate earnings," as opponents refer to dividend taxation, did not exist in the political lexicon. Now it is front and center.

As for the third piece, tax cuts in 2002 and 2003 drove up depreciation rates to the point where companies can now write off at least half the cost of their investments in the first year.

And with his 2003 budget, Bush appeared to have followed Christian's fourth recommendation precisely by proposing "lifetime savings accounts" that would allow everyone, regardless of age or income, to shield $7,500 a year from investment taxation. The accounts would be accessible at any time for any reason. A family of five could put away $37,500 annually, a figure that very few Americans could even contemplate saving.

Of course, what seems to get lost in all this is federal spending levels. Some people have suggested the tax cuts are a way of starving the federal government of money...but the national debt ceiling continues to be raised too regularly for me to put much faith in that idea. I don't think enough Republicans in Congress have the political balls to engage in any hard reform.

Posted by drizzten at 03:35 AM | Permalink

...but I didn't find out about the event until after the fact.

I've searched around and collected some of the things he spoke about.

Dean Stumps on President's Home Ground

My message is balance the budget. My message is health insurance for every American. I don't see why that wouldn't play here.

As governor, Dean signed the civil unions law that gives gay and lesbian couples all the rights and benefits of marriage granted by the state. He also lowered the state's income and sales taxes and received high ratings from the National Rifle Association by opposing gun control measures.

Howard Dean Riles 'Em Up

All of us are equal, or none of us is equal.

Bush uses the term 'quotas' to describe affirmative action at the University of Michigan. The University of Michigan doesn't have a quota system, and that's a race-loaded term intended to frighten Americans afraid of losing their jobs.

Presidential hopeful rallies backers in Austin

If you say, 'You have a choice: You can keep the tax cuts, or you can have health insurance that will never be taken away; you can keep the tax cuts, or you can fully fund special education so your class size doesn't expand,' . . . people are going to choose jobs, health care and education because they didn't get the tax cuts.

And just briefly, we don't need more tax money going towards education. Bush fucked up with the education bill and the damage needs to be undone.

Democratic candidate holds rally

[Bush has] divided us by race by talking about quotas. He's divided us by gender by attacking Title IX. I'm tired, Mr. President, of being divided."

In Houston...

People's property taxes in Texas are going to go up ... People's property taxes are going up because the federal government and state government aren't sending as much money to Houston as they used to.

[...]

As for the dilemma of health care for illegal immigrants, Dean would have the federal government pick up the tab for the children of undocumented immigrants.

[...]

Dean, saying he was distraught with rising unemployment and a growing national deficit...

No way I'd support him.

Posted by drizzten at 06:30 PM | Permalink

Mideast Peace Effort Shaken After Attacks

Hamas and other militants have rejected the so-called "road map" peace effort and abandoned talks with Palestinian premier Mahmoud Abbas, who wants them to stop attacking Israelis but says he won't use force to ensure they comply. Israel has resumed killing militants in strikes that frequently take the lives of innocents, too. And the Hamas militant group is wreaking havoc in Israel, killing 16 on Wednesday in a grisly bus bombing.

[...]

"What is needed now is an American rescue mission" for the road map, said Israel TV diplomatic correspondent Keren Neubach, expressing a rare consensus among both experts and ordinary people on both sides. "Without massive American pressure, nothing will move."

[...]

For the moment, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon vows to continue fighting Hamas, Hamas officials vow to continue with their attacks, and Palestinian Authority officials, caught in the middle, issue ineffectual appeals for calm.

The cycle of violence both feeds off and is driven by public opinion: with 24 Palestinians and 21 Israelis killed since the June 4 summit, ordinary people on both sides are mired in colliding narratives of victimhood, their leaders each blaming the other side for dooming the peace effort.

Israelis went to bed Wednesday with horrifying images from the bus bombing: a charred body hanging out of a shattered window; a man being taken away on a stretcher, his stomach ripped open; a woman's broken body lying on the sidewalk.

Palestinians felt equally victimized. A missile strike 45 minutes after the bus bombing killed two militants but also five civilians, some burned beyond recognition. Doctors at Gaza's Shifa Hospital treated the wounded on floors running red with blood. And witnesses charged that Israeli helicopters fired missiles at people that gathered to clear the wounded after the initial strike.

Who knows what may happen in the future. Perhaps genuine reformers could come to power on either side and work something out, spending vast amounts of political capital in order to accomplish something substantial. It's possible.

But I don't see it happening any time soon. All I see are people who hate each other, killing each other. All that energy would be so infinitely more useful if channelled towards art or business. It's just sad.

UPDATE(6/25/2003 6:40pm)
Well, that was an interesting 12-hour news cycle. This morning, we were told Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah had agreed to a three-month cease-fire. Now, it's being denied by all three groups. Israel's very much lukewarm response to the initial reports notwithstanding, this is the quickest way to effectively begin a real peace process.

Posted by drizzten at 01:48 AM | Permalink

Rob Lowe would make one ugly woman.

Posted by drizzten at 08:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Too many cabs? City ready to cut back

New Yorkers have long grumbled that there are too few taxis to serve their city, especially on a rainy day when catching a coveted cab can turn into urban sport.

Austin isn't Manhattan. And when it comes to taxis, this city's problem isn't a cab shortage; it's a cab surplus -- at least according to those in the driver's seat.

Responding to pressure from Austin taxi drivers who say that their livelihood is threatened by too many cabs and too few passengers, the city is offering a deal that many in this faltering economy would grab in a New York minute.

They are proposing to cut future competition.

If the City Council signs off on the deal Thursday, Austin will become one more city on a growing list around the country to place what amounts to a moratorium on the issuing of taxicab permits -- much to the chagrin of some of the city's expansion-minded taxi franchise owners, who argue that the ordinance would make it harder to find a cab.

The simplest answer to stupidity like this is twofold:

1. Do away with the $400 permits and allow anyone who has the desire and capability to run a taxicab to do so. This would drive the numbers of taxi cabs in Austin up, since the barriers to entry would be so low.
   
2. Once real competition sets in, those who are unable to compete would leave the market. Competition drives down profit margins so eventually people would back out of the market. Such moves would eventually stabilize into a situation where the free market decides how many cabs Austin needs because the people who use the cabs would be the ones making the choices.

"It's one thing to say we need to have so many taxis per person, but if the population isn't riding in the taxis, the ones who lose out are the drivers," said Hannah Riddering, 50, who has been driving a taxi on and off since the 1970s and fighting for an ordinance change since 1988.

"The drivers have to earn a decent living out here."

UPDATE(11/21/2003 1:10am)
More here. It seems the Council may have changed it's mind.

Posted by drizzten at 08:01 PM | Permalink

Nirvana Song Called Best of Past 25 Years

Here they are now, entertaining us or at least entertaining VH1, which named Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit" the greatest song of the past quarter-century. The Seattle band's groundbreaking grunge anthem is No. 1 on VH1's list of the "100 Greatest Songs of the Past 25 Years."

Michael Jackson's "Billie Jean" made #2 while Pink Floyd's "Another Brick In The Wall (Part 2)" only made #15? Prince's "When Doves Cry" made #7 but Red Hot Chili Peppers' "Under The Bridge" got screwed at #41? And what the fuck is Britany Spears' "…Baby One More Time" at #28 when Radiohead's "Creep" is insulted with #84 or Pearl Jam's "Jeremy" is placed at #32?!?!

Why is Hanson's "MMMBop" even on this damn list? Ugh.

The popular music from the 80's and 90's (disregarding some 80's metal and most of 90's grunge) is stuff I won't touch and lists like this reinforce it further. I only recently dipped a toe into The Police's catalogue and have mixed feelings about them.

This list is also a broad swipe at electronic music and hip-hop, but given their only recent explosion, I can understand it. Still, I have songs from Underworld, Amon Tobin, DJ Shadow, Ben Folds Five, Stone Temple Pilots, and Philip Glass that are better than 80% of this list.

I couldn't possibly pick a song to be "the greatest from the last 25 years," but "Smells Like Teen Spirit" would be one of them. R.I.P., Kurt.

Posted by drizzten at 07:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

After I finally purchased the Gasaraki Perfect Collection DVD box set, I sat down with some friends to watch it over the weekend. I was impressed, not only by the content, but by how interesting it paralleled some of today's current events. I'll make a post about it in the upcoming week.

Posted by drizzten at 08:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

I spent some time at the Texas Brewer's Festival today. Hot, but a pleasant experience.

The breweries represented were Bitter End, The Draught House (yay!), Lovejoys Tap Room and Brewery, North by Northwest Brewery, Brenham Brewery, Live Oak Brewing Company, Real Ale Brewing Company, and Saint Arnold Brewing Company.

Even though the deal was outside, it's frickn' hot, and there was little shade, the atmosphere was lively, the beer tasty, and the wind active. It was great to get outside and ge away from politics for a while.

UPDATE(5/4/2004 9:15am)
Time for 2004's TCBF!

Posted by drizzten at 06:13 PM | Permalink

[Updates below.]

Smoking ban passes with a 4-3 vote

The Hazards of a Smoke-Free Environment

The bandwagon of local smoking bans now steamrolling across the nation--from New York City to San Antonio--has nothing to do with protecting people from the supposed threat of "second-hand" smoke. Indeed, the bans themselves are symptoms of a far more grievous threat, a cancer that has been spreading for decades and has now metastasized throughout the body politic, spreading even to the tiniest organs of local government.

This cancer is the only real hazard involved--the cancer of unlimited government power.

The issue is not whether second-hand smoke is a real danger or a phantom menace, as a study published recently in the British Medical Journal indicates. The issue is: if it were harmful, what would be the proper reaction? Should anti-tobacco activists satisfy themselves with educating people about the potential danger and allowing them to make their own decisions--or should they seize the power of government and force people to make the "right" decision?

UPDATE(12:06pm)
News8Austin has a poll open as well as a comment thread for those who voted. I wrote:

This law completely disrespects private property rights and sticks a thumb in the eye of the idea that each person is responsible for their own actions. At a time of economic distress, it seems unreal the City Council would attempt to stifle the nightclub market with regulation like this. This is a bad idea and I hope Wynn et al overturns it down the road.

-Charles Hueter

UPDATE(6/7/2003 8:30pm)
How the city plans to enforce this:

The ban will be enforced on a complaint basis, handled by Health and Human Services.

Any person caught violating the ban can be fined up to $2,000 and an establishment could have its operating license revoked.

UPDATE(10/15/2003 2:02am)
Good news: the Austin Smoking Task Force Report is in and it's definitely worth your read.

UPDATE(4/21/2004 4:18pm)
The ban, initially scheduled to take affect on May 1st, has been posponed:

The city of Austin's new smoking ordinance will likely be postponed a month until June 1. The main reason is to give restaurants more time to show they've improved their air quality.

Dan McClusky's owner Steve Batlin lucked out. His restaurant has always had a separate room for non-smokers and smokers.

"I really don't think it's necessary. I'm a non-smoker myself. I think it's coming," Batlin said.

The new smoking ordinance is coming, but now it may be one month later. Before they get a smoking permit, restaurants must show they have dual ventilation systems. Lots of business owners installed them to meet the previous ordinance, but the city didn't keep a list.

Copyright ©2004TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin

UPDATE(6/1/2004 11:05am)
Austin Smoking Ban in Effect Today

UPDATED 5/9/2005 9:12am
The Additional Tyranny - The New Austin Smoking Ban Passes

UPDATED 8/30/2005 1:52pm
Deadline for the Austin Smoking Ordinance

Posted by drizzten at 07:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (10)

[Updates below.]

Don't expect a vote to occur until past 2pm. The ordinance and other similiar kinds of activities aren't set to be addressed on the City Council agenda until 1:30pm and the smoking code is 17th on a list of 60 things to do.

There are promising signs that the new restrictions may be in for some trouble, however.

Members raced well past rush hour to shape the ordinance before a final vote, scheduled for today. By nightfall, with all the moving pieces parked at least until morning, the proposal to ban smoking in bars and music venues seemed to be unraveling.

But no one was really sure.

"There's a lot of balls in the air. We'll have to talk some more tomorrow," said Mayor Gus Garcia, who has led the charge toward a smoking ban. "For tonight, I'm going to let them think this thing through."

For weeks, the council has been split 4-3 over the proposal. Those seeking to derail or at least delay the ban -- council members Raul Alvarez, Jackie Goodman and Will Wynn -- have been left to dig for a fourth vote.

Earlier this week, Goodman and Alvarez proposed a last-minute resolution that would kick the whole issue to a new task force. Wynn, who will replace Garcia as mayor, has suggested putting off a vote until the new council is seated in two weeks.

But the chase didn't really begin until Wednesday, when the majority started to crack.

First was Council Member Danny Thomas, who said he favored a ban in restaurants. But like opponents of the measure, he feared the economic impact on bars, including music venues.

Then, a half-hour before the supposed close of city business, Council Member Daryl Slusher suggested putting the item on the November ballot. Voters will probably decide the fate of a Travis County health care district the same day, he said, and a referendum would pre-empt efforts by a future council or irate petition-signers to undo whatever comes out of today's meeting.

The proposal sent both sides scrambling.

Club owners who fear a financial hit initially cheered, then started worrying that non-smokers who make up a majority of Austinites might win at the polls.

Health groups, who have long said a ban is the only way to protect employees from second-hand smoke, warned that tobacco companies might spend freely on an election that would keep their wares burning in Austin bars.

The health groups blinked first. Shortly after 5 p.m. Wednesday, supporters of a total ban told Garcia that they would rather see an exemption for bars than an election on the whole ordinance.

And I wouldn't support even a lesser increase in restrictions. That isn't the freakin' point at contention here.

But about that time, Slusher was meeting with City Manager Toby Futrell and City Attorney Sedora Jefferson. They were checking Austin's City Charter to see whether it's legal for the council to call an election on a smoking ordinance: an item that does not amend the charter itself or authorize tax-supported bond debt.

It turns out it's not. At least it appeared that way late Wednesday night.

"This doesn't look too good, if the city attorneys are saying we can't do it," Slusher said a little after 6 p.m. "It just shows that we're trying to look at every possible approach."

The proposal already has more exceptions than Garcia would like.

UPDATE(6/6/2003 7:20am)
It passed.

The council voted 4 to 3, with Mayor elect Will Wynn, Councilmember Raul Alvarez, and Mayor Pro Tem Jackie Goodman voting against the ordinance.

Thursday night was the third and final reading.

Before the vote, Alvarez proposed an amendment that would exempt bars from the ban.

The council voted against the amendment.

[...]

The ordinance goes into effect in September.

The ordinance does not take effect until Sept. 1, meaning a new council might still have time to overturn it. Council Member Will Wynn, who voted against the ordinance, will soon become mayor, replacing Garcia, who steps down next month. Saturday's runoff election to replace Wynn pits Brewster McCracken, who opposes the regulations, against Margot Clarke, who favors them.

Wynn said he expects the next council to take the ordinance up again. The council also formed a task force to report back on the issue in August.

Well, I'm angry but not surprised. To expect property rights and self-ownership to be respected in the face of public health and workers' rights socialism is probably a little too optimisitic in this city. Not much else for me to say.

UPDATE(6/7/2003 8:35pm)
How the city plans to enforce this:

The ban will be enforced on a complaint basis, handled by Health and Human Services.

Any person caught violating the ban can be fined up to $2,000 and an establishment could have its operating license revoked.

UPDATE(10/15/2003 2:04am)
Good news: the Austin Smoking Task Force Report is in and it's definitely worth your read.

UPDATE(4/21/2004 4:16pm)
The ban, initially scheduled to take affect on May 1st, has been posponed:

The city of Austin's new smoking ordinance will likely be postponed a month until June 1. The main reason is to give restaurants more time to show they've improved their air quality.

Dan McClusky's owner Steve Batlin lucked out. His restaurant has always had a separate room for non-smokers and smokers.

"I really don't think it's necessary. I'm a non-smoker myself. I think it's coming," Batlin said.

The new smoking ordinance is coming, but now it may be one month later. Before they get a smoking permit, restaurants must show they have dual ventilation systems. Lots of business owners installed them to meet the previous ordinance, but the city didn't keep a list.

Copyright ©2004TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin

UPDATE(6/1/2004 11:05am)
Austin Smoking Ban in Effect Today

UPDATED 5/9/2005 9:14am
The Additional Tyranny - The New Austin Smoking Ban Passes

UPDATED 8/30/2005 1:54pm
Deadline for the Austin Smoking Ordinance

Posted by drizzten at 07:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Up until only last December, when the genres of surf revival and surf rock came up in conversation, I usually had little to add other than a few mutterings of the great name Dick Dale and a few assorted punk outfits. I liked the apparent complexity of the work and the interesting melodies they could ring out of the guitar, but I was more focused on my burgeoning jazz and classical collections.

That changed when the 2002 Christmas rolled along. It was my side of the family's turn to visit the other, so Christmas shopping needed to be done for my Canadian relatives, my male cousins being the most important since one is my age and the other is almost so. They are almost like friends.

Dan is the one my age and the one I had the hardest time deciding what to get. He's deeply into punk and had heard of Emo's all the way up there. He wanted some local music and I told him I'd do what I could. Of course, considering I go out so little, I realized I didn't have a good grasp of the local Austin music scene. Panic ensued.

One weekend I woke up from a sleepover and was possessed by one of those "get shit done" bugs, so I got up, brushed myself off, and drove out to 33º to examine their local music selection. I choose Thirtythree Degress over Waterloo Records because I prefer the more intimate listening environment to test-listen new CDs. Yeah, the single room they use pulls triplicate duty as salesfloor, front counter, and listening area, but the mood is usually (at least whenever I'm there) more reserved and attuned to listening. They also seem to have a much more eclectic selection, though that's just my uninformed superficial opinion.

Anway, I was digging around in the garage section and ran across an album called Spitfire Bar-Bee from a band named The Longhorn Devils.

Holy shit. You can't get anymore Austin than that! I thought. Who knows what these guys sound like? There's this hot chick on the cover and she's all 50's-classy - and there's a freakin' WWII-era prop plane right behind her complete with nasty shark mouth cowl painting!

I had no idea I was about to listen to instrumental surf rock. Dutch instrumental surf rock. And damn good Dutch instrumental surf rock, might I add. Further making the whole deal seem too cool to pass up, it turns out their label is based in Austin, but they are really from overseas. Considering punk's surf rock roots and the music I've heard Dan enjoy, I figured this was as close to dead-on as I was going to get.

But I wasn't sure if I wanted to give this disc to my cousin...there was only one copy and the lady behind the counter told me they only had a few of them. (!!!)

I ended up taking it over to him as his gift (which he enjoyed, BTW), but not after I burned as set of MP3s for myself. Once I listened to the music a few times, it was all downhill from there. Shortly thereafter I picked up Man or Astro-man?'s Made From Technetium and was finally introduced to the music I had heard so much about, though only through acclaim and not in any usefully descriptive musical way. I had thought they were some off-beat sci-fi outfit like a Pixies-esque White Zombie. Drop the White Zombie and replace it with the transposed themes of a grainy clip of Cold War-era USSR satellite video and Endless Summer and you're half the way there.

Listening to TLD is a much-welcome break from everything else in my collection. The insane picking and harmonics flowing from the midsection of "Shark Chase" that gracefully drifts into the last section, a piece who's jazziness is only surpassed by it's explosion back into surf energy at the end. "Clash of the Titans" starts out as if you are charging with the Brits into a vast unknown jungle safari and the adventure runs along smoothly until you run smack into a platoon of rough and vile pirate-smugglers who immediately give chase through the dense undergrowth only to be defeated Speed Racer-style by some moronic oversight. The lounge act feel of the opening to "Templar's Surf" is narcotic, growing in intensity until it levels off in a easygoing bridge which breaks down into several mini-sections that all have unique atmospheres to them, kinda like the Red Elvis's mindblowing "Surfing In Siberia."

It's a pity they only have the one album out.

Posted by drizzten at 12:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)

Upon hearing that the UK will be encouraging healthier living in order to keep it's inefficient National Healthcare System financially viable, I figured people would think it's a reasonable step to take. I mean, any healthcare system (private or not) wants to keep costs down as much as possible. This is particularly important for taxpayer-funded systems because the ability to pay higher costs isn't as elastic as it is with private systems.

Of course, this is on a different continent, in a different country, with a totally different mindset:

Plans for patients to sign up to healthier lifestyles in return for NHS care were today branded as patronising and humiliating by patient organisations and public health experts.

Under the plans, set out in a Labour party policy document, patients would be expected to follow their doctors' instructions on healthy eating, taking more exercise or quitting smoking.

But Claire Rayner, president of the Patients' Association, branded the proposal to ask smokers and overweight people to sign healthy lifestyle contracts as "oppressive and obscene".

She said the implication of the plan was to blame people for their own poor health and suggest that they would have to pay more for healthcare because they had brought their illness on themselves.

What an idiot. Just as Steven Den Beste is irritated with attempts to water down the term "political prisoner" with people who certainly don't deserve the description, calling this obscene is one of the worst aggrandizements I've heard this year. "Oppressive" this is not. Living in Cuba is oppressive. The UK's tax code is oppressive.

Of course there are health issues outside human control. But the simple things like eating right and treating yourself right are entirely up to each person to decide how to handle. These are the bits harped on the most on our side of the pond, and Jebus knows how badly some of our citizens need the wake up call. The UK government wants the slobs to clean up their act because they are placing a heavier burden on NHS.

Skipping her wild cries of class warfare...

Amanda Sandford, research manager of the anti-smoking organisation Ash, warned that the proposed contracts could prove counter productive.

She said: "While trying to get people to reflect on their individual responsibilities is an interesting idea, I have doubts about trying to make this a contract.

"The last thing we want is sanctions against smokers. Most people attempt to quit two or three times before they do.

"This proposal would risk implying that people are failures if they don't quit first time, which goes against what smoking cessation experts advise."

Geof Rayner, chairman of the UK Public Health Association, said the plan focused too much on the individual without considering the wider social reasons behind poor health.

He said: "We've got to get away from individualising poor health. You don't explain the rise of diabetes by individual lifestyle choices.

His diabetes comment might have made more sense if we weren't talking about the easiest things for people to do to improve their health on their own.

"What will never work is humiliating people into compliance. I'm sure that isn't the intention here but the real issue is why do people feel miserable and not in control of their lives."

A Labour party spokesman said the consultation document was "not about restricting treatment or making treatment conditional".

He said the contract would set out the standards of care patients should receive from the NHS but also remind them of the reciprocal nature of the relationship.

"This type of agreement would not be legally binding. It would take the form of a joint statement of 'mutual intent'," states the document.

Repeated several times in this and the first document are the statements of officials saying this isn't a mandated thing, that no one will be denied treatment if they refuse to sign the contract. I haven't read the deal myself, but the statements seems pretty unequivocal to me.

John Chisholm, chairman of the British Medical Association's GPs committee, said the plans appeared to threaten the doctor-patient relationship and even to deny people the free care they are entitled to.

Posted by drizzten at 09:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

[Updates below.]

February 12, 2003:

SUSAN LEE WRITES THAT LIBERTARIANS HAVE MORE FUN: And they don't mind gay marriage.

That would be me, on both counts.

As a libertarian...

Fixing potlholes [sic] and funding education should be the responsibility of state and local governments.

UPDATE(10/22/2003 7:35am)
Another libertarian beef with Glenn Reynolds here.

UPDATE 1/20/2005 12:25pm
Glenn Reynolds is NOT a Libertarian

UPDATED 9/26/2005 2:35pm
He hasn't been paying attention to An Intellectually and Morally Serious Antiwar Movement.

Posted by drizzten at 12:37 PM | Permalink

[Updates below.]

When I first heard about the new Austin smoking ordinance, I had hoped whatever sanity was left in the City Council would just block the damn idea and move on to more important things. Of course, I underestimated them and now here we are.

The agenda of the City Council has the proposed smoking law (PDF) set for it's final reading and voting on the 5th. The full text of the document being considered can be found online; former link has just the proposed law rather than all the "official" arguments in the latter.

It looks bad, folks. The definitions in the draft...

Employee - a person who volunteers for a non-profit entity
Employer - a person that employs the services of one or more individuals
Enclosed area - a space that is enclosed on all sides by solid walls that extend from the floor to the ceiling, exclusive of windows and doors
Operator - the owner or person in charge of a public place or workplace, including an employer
Retail tobacco store - a retail store used primarily for the sale of tobacco products and accessories and in which the sale of other non-tobacco products is incidental
Smoking - to inhale or exhale the smoke from or to have a lighted tobacco product
Workplace - an enclosed area in which employeeswork or have access during the course of their employment

The prohibitions...

Someone commits an offense if he or she

One larger step for Washington

U.S. communications regulators on Monday narrowly approved sweeping new rules that will allow television broadcasters to expand their reach, despite fears about reducing the diversity of viewpoints.

The Republican-led Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 to allow the broadcast networks to own television stations that reach 45 percent of the U.S. audience, up from 35 percent.

Citing a need to update decades-old rules to reflect new sources of entertainment, information and news via cable television and the Internet, the FCC also voted to lift a ban that prevents a company from owning both a newspaper and a television or radio station in the same market -- except in cases involving the smallest markets.

UPDATE(6/3/2003 2:15am)
Then again, with friends like these...anything is possible. Feel free to ignore any "free market" rhetoric from these guys and their supporters. They don't understand the meaning of the phrase.

UPDATE(6/21/2003 2:05pm)
Panel rejects new FCC rules

The Senate Commerce Committee voted Thursday to overturn parts of a Federal Communications Commission decision allowing media companies to buy more outlets and merge in new ways.
The proposal, which faces an uncertain future in the full Senate and a tough road in the House, would roll back changes that allowed individual companies to own television stations reaching nearly half the nation's viewers and combinations of newspapers and broadcast stations in the same city.

"I would like the FCC to start all over," said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, who opposes the changed rules. She said they are "potentially dangerous to media diversity in this country."

[...]

Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and other lawmakers say they also will try other methods to overturn the changes.

"The airwaves belong to the people," Dorgan said. "The FCC ignores that requirement and advances corporate interests at the expense of the public's interest."

Posted by drizzten at 12:14 PM | Permalink

I'm a fan of Orbital's music ever since I heard "Halcyon+On+On" from the Hackers soundtrack and the single I heard from the Wipeout XL game. One of their albums I don't have is In Sides and last night while poking around in Waterloo Records, I found the album in their used section for ten bucks. Happily surprised it was a double-disc album, I picked it up along with a few other CDs and drove home.

A side note: has anyone noticed piss-poor performance from freedb? I use it for my CD database lookup with Exact Audio Copy. Damn database hasn't been able to find squat in weeks.

Anyway, I started to rip the CD to MP3 when I ran into that freedb problem. I went to Orbital's website to check out it's discography. Upon finding the album, I discovered they didn't keep the same tracklist on the second CD for their various international releases. The US got two releases:

Times Fly (Slow)
Sad But New
Times Fly (Fast)
The Tranquilizer
The Box (EP)

and later on:

Satan (Industry Standard)
Satan (Live at New York)
The Saint
The Sinner
Halcyon (Live at New York)

France got:

The Saint
The Sinner
Satan (Live at New York)
Chime (Live at Chelmsford)
Impact (Live at Chelmsford)

Canada got:

Satan (Industry Standard edit)
Satan (Live at New York)
The Saint
The Sinner

Japan got:

The Saint
The Sinner
Satan (Recorded Live)
Chime (Recorded Live At The V96 Festival, Chelmsford)
Impact (Recorded Live At The V96 Festival, Chelmsford)

The second UK release had only The Saint on the second disc.

Obviously, most of these songs are repeated throughout the various distributions. But as a music collector, I want all those other songs and their variations...but I don't want to have to buy the album again and again and again. Some would argue this is or would be a valid reason to hop on over to the nearest peer-to-peer network and get those tracks. I don't agree with that, but I can certainly understand the frustration that drives the mindset.

Posted by drizzten at 12:10 PM | Permalink