Lean mean governing machine (not a Schwarzennegger post)

How effective is our government? There are varying views of its practical efficiency (a term here defined by me as an ability to process laws or govern at an acceptable rate), but my view is that it does a poor job. Part of this is due in part to keep corruption at a minimum through bureaucratic red tape, but part also is due in part to the changing political view of representation as a job rather than a service.

The political machine has become so bloated and complex that the average person has little time (with the average work week increasing in hours spent) to become thoroughly involved in the political process. So, does this lead us on the path to plutocracy? Are there other options? I would suggest trimming some fat. The first thing that can be done is to remove many laws from the book. Government is good. Government is necessary. But overlegislation only creates elitist conflicts in our legal-political system. Elitist conflicts should only take place in our educational or social systems. Of course that might be difficult if not impossible to do with the interrelationships between all systems, but a good start would be the simplification of our legal code. (As an aside there is a children's book that demonstrates strange but true laws from actual states- ie you cannot sneeze on a train in Nashville).

Cutting back on bureaucracy is another idea, but that is a delicate process. While some redundancy is necessary as a protection, there are some areas which could be cut in an effort to simplify government. That should be a topic for another day with more time to research.

Loony Toons

Their seems to be a large amount of discussion about a recent South Park episode showing a defecating Jesus and a "censored" image of Mohammed. For a more detailed explanation visit the Volokh Conspiracy.

The debate centers around the Muslim policy of never showing images of the prophet Mohammed. This infringes on the democratic principles of free speech, under which satirical images qualify. Compounding the problem is the threat of violence from extremists who are all too eager to claim their virgins. Americans loathe giving in to violent factions, so where and how do we draw the line?

Moderate factions of Islam apparently do not have the same issue with Mohammad's image as seen in this report on a truce with Jyllands-Posten (the Danish newspaper of original fame). So do we give in violent extremist wings out of fear/freedom of religion/respect of Islam? Do we demonstrate our belief in the freedom of the press and publish or broadcast what we wish? Do we adopt some sort of middle ground for visual media like an internationally accepted "Mohammad symbol"? (I think Prince is done using his...)

I think the best way to demonstrate our respect for Islam is to disrespect it just as much as Christianity and Judaism. Otherwise Muslims will be outsiders. But, considering this is a forum, I would like to hear your thoughts, also...

The Gospel of Judas

I'm not sure how coincidental it is that Easter is fast upon us and National Geographic reports that it has verified and translated a text dating from 300 A.D. stating that Judas betrayed Jesus upon Jesus' request. Its clearly a fascinating (heretical or otherwise) find.

The meat of what the link shows:

The text begins "the secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot."

The key passage comes when Jesus tells Judas "you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothed me."

This indicates that Judas would help liberate the spiritual self by helping Jesus get rid of his physical flesh, the scholars said.

Thoughts and comments?

Am I Hot or Not: Immigrants

I've been reading some interesting posts on immigration like this one, and I got jealous. I figured we should start our own incredibly controversial thread on the topic.


Is Immigration Good or Bad for America?
It's possible immigrants take jobs Americans are eager to perform, increasing our unemployment. But this picture is incomplete. It only looks at Americans at work, and ignores them at the store.

Suppose open immigration meant 10,000 Americans lost their 25k/yr jobs. But prices decrease by $1 on some essential item, any product 50 million Americans buy at least once a month. The country's collective pocketbook has lost 250m in salaries, but saved 600m on an needed good.

If you're worried about moving money around from workers to consumers like this, we could tax the cheaper goods and provide better unemployment benefits. A fifty cent tax on these items would return the salaries to those Americans who lost their jobs while still putting cheaper food on their dinner table, and giving me a $50m bonus without anyone noticing.

Even if these numbers aren't realistic, I'm not sure we help anyone by insulating them from competition. Adam Smith pointed this folly out a long time ago.

How Should We Enforce Our Immigration Policy?
Whatever the democratic decision is on (1) after all the data is in, we should enforce our laws as if we believe in them. So while I support more open immigration policies (tied to better unemployment benefits), I'm not offended by some of the protectionists' ideas for tougher border controls.

I recommend we stop deportations back to Mexico, and begin deporting directly to Canada.

It's Just Not Cool Any More

With ETA proposing a permanent cease-fire, the Red Brigade not having shown up for a long time, HAMAS getting legitimacy... what is happening to traditional terrorist movements?

My guess is that for more moderate viewpoints - which excludes HAMAS - terrorism doesn't engender sympathy or funding like it may have in the past. There is certainly not the same precedent of negotiating demands. We might be seeing the end of the Cold War era terrorist groups.

Thoughts? Predictions? Disagreements with mine?

State of the Blog

Its been six months since the inception of this blog, and as moderator I thought we should open the blog up for editorial comment. I ask all readers and contributors to please comment on the nature of Theory Bloc, and how you believe it should evolve from this point.

Initially, the idea was to have a forum where people could speak on a range of different social issues freely, without concern for flaming or other generally negative forms of discourse. Posting recently has been low, and several contributors have not posted nor commented at all. Are there any thoughts as to contributors and their contributions? Part of me wishes to trim the list of contributors down, but some people may not have had topics come up that they wish to comment upon. As per the design of Blogger, anyone can view and comment on Theory Bloc, so keep that in mind.

Please give your thoughts about how this blog should change, and things you wish to keep the same. As usual democracy rules, with exceptions being made for vocal minorities.

Not just another bull crap post

Japanese scientists have found a way to change cow dung into gasoline. Using heat and pressure, the scientists were able to change 3.5 ounces of cow dung into .042 ounces of gasoline. While this sounds like a tremendously low amount of gasoline, especially for a country with as little arable land as Japan, my wife and I have calculated (without doublechecking mind you) that this amounts to 1.6 gallons of gasoline per year just from Japanese cow waste.

While this would not help as an effective greenhouse gas alternative, It would create the ability for us to lower energy costs. Finally putting trash to actual use is a good first step! Thoughts?