Neo

^. I'm more pro-Union than I may appear. The "pro" part of me arises in the individual choice to organize. I view this as analogous to capital's right to assemble. In terms of leverage, scale is greater. No qualm, there. Regarding Columbus - I've not read that, but my first reaction is that the analysis is worthwhile. I am fond of keeping the uncontrollable nature of the world in mind when discussing policy. I had dinner the other night with one of the magical minds that my life's allowed me to interact with. He described Europe, terror, immigration and the future in terms of birth rates. No conclusions (he's thoughtful enough to realize he doesn't know everything), but his point was that by 2050? Europe will be culturally very different regardless of whether or not another bomb explodes. Not good, not bad, just the trajectory of mankind, government be damned.

^. Well, yes, efficiency is one thing. That's the virtue I was extolling. I agree that profit, cash, growth all come into play. Profit is shorthand. Perhaps I should've said "corporate objectives represented by the word profit". I am glad you're autonomous. In the right hands, that's efficient. I suspect yours are the right ones. My meaningful difference? The alignment of wallets. Responding to your thoughtfulness made me aware of an attribute beyond the taxing capability. However you define the objective, I believe, your efforts are more aligned with more shareholders than the councilman's department manager's are with all town citizens. The interests are fewer. You move my goalposts when you make me think. They're still in the same endzone. For simplicity ... do you agree, generally, that they're different but disagree with the magnitude and significance?

WBoE: I agree with the flow. I don't think one scenario is nearly as efficient as the other. I feel better represented by employees at a firm than I do by government bureaucrats (no perjorative in that word). One, the link is more direct and checked no less often than quarterly. Two, the results are easier to measure (bottom line). Three, the negotiating employee represents aligned shareholder interests (profit) while the bureaucrat represents often contradictory interests. There are similarities. There are greater differences as I examine. Wholly different? No. Meaningfully different? Yes. Am I off base? We've: I did mix my socials and businesses. Enjoy the Holidays. Liberal bona fides time - I'm glad there's an EPA (although I think pendulums can swing too far in two directions). I've stated my general desire for an ACA like benefit for all. TBPhD: Scholarly, as always. Can I say slightly left, in general, and slightly right among the attentive? Further, slightly left among all regarding social issues? I'll click the links this evening. Dom and D4rk: I'm playing with "fair", "good" and adding "same and equal". I've done this for years in my head.

I'll restate using my words to make sure I'm getting it right. I agree that what two entities agree to at arm's length is something capitalists call market rate and consider fair. Did I get that?

I don't agree with that thing you said. : ) I agree language is critical and often a challenge on web boards. It is for me, and I edit and edit and edit. The discussion of "fair" would be epic.

Taking the challenge and providing an opening salvo on the two you've bolded. 1) Public Sector unions. Bad. The party paying the freight isn't at the table. Unlike an employee / employer relationship in unionization, where both wallets sit at the bargaining table with limited resources (regardless of how large or small they may be), public sector unions sit at the table with government bureaucrats and the government's power to levy taxes. The decisions you get in this instance are different than the decisions you get when the limited wallets are at the table. I hope that's not controversial, but i'm learning. Conclusion, and open for debate and controversy ... this is good for the employee, and bad for the taxpayer. No comment on the many "good" things that public sector unions have provided. The necessary balance of interests isn't at the table is my point. I'll await the "but the bureaucrats represent the people" responses while cheating preemptively. If anyone thinks SBA, Fannie and Freddy bureaucrats make economically the same decisions traditional lenders do .... well, I guess you do. See $1,500 hammers for and $2,300 toilet seats as exhibits 1 and 2. The same political servant class is negotiating the compensation of the IRS public sector union employees. 2) Civil Rights Act. Good. I can think of few things I'm happier about when discussing a shift from right to left during my lifetime. Perfect, probably not, but i can't think of a flaw of which i'm aware. If Title IX's keeping UB from having a hockey team, that might be one. For the record, this LBJ accomplishment had a lot to do with his ability to bring Democrats along. In fact, his nomination had a lot to do with the DNC's conclusion that he was electable. "Southern but not TOO southern" by a DNC recognizing that reform was coming. Richard Russell, Jr. from Georgia may have been next man up if Civil Rights wasn't ready to hatch.) The moderate and patrician Republican party, particularly in the northeast, was largely ready (a few important Senators notwithstanding). Read Caro's LBJ - titanically awesome. The shift is in two parties. I write on the web. I am not expert in these topics. Assail away!

^^. Better said!

When I was younger, that meant "you must be wrong" to me. Today it means "I'll revisit my thoughts".

Social issues, check, correct? Business, I'm gonna disagree. I'll start with "easy". The government's role in business has gone from zero to sixty. Use Drunkard's Nixon-EPA and 18,000 regulations as one exhibit. How about the ACA regulating 1/6th of the economy, whether you're for or against? Republican and Democrat - this isn't a one party versus the other argument. If you view labor influence as nearly eliminated, we don't see labor unions in the same zip code. Some of the largest in the country didn't exist until Kennedy signed a public Union authorization order in 1962 (lawyers, check me; sincerest intent; if I'm wrong on the authorization, I think I'm right on their influence). Exist precedes influence (Sartre, I'm newly exposed!). Bernie Sanders is a legitimate major party candidate. George Bush set record deficits (at the time) only to be eclipsed by his successor. Our Supreme Court finds rights by "penumbra and emanation". The Civil Rights Act and titles I through XI. The Great Society, Welfare, Medicare! Both parties and the people carved the course. You can call this wonderful progress or electoral suicide, but it's "lefter" than 1960, no? Interesting ... I didn't think my observation would be at all controversial. My views and conclusions, YES, but not my observation. I think the President would agree the continuum's shifted. He'd say not far enough! Carry on ....

Drunkard -- agree. I was talking about the continuum, itself. The whole body, right and left. Not good, not bad, for this conversation. I'd say, now that you bring it up, that today's furthest right is closer to Goldwater than today's furthest left is close to Kennedy. On this, though, I'm giving a sense, and not data or proof. The conclusion I reference is my own about the staying power of the Reagan Revolution. I was wrong.

I had to check if anything I wrote appeared. It did. Check your screen. One of us missed it.

For your consideration .... there are millions of us who'd be happy to play "mine's bigger than yours" with compassion, contribution, time, talent and tithe who don't want, need, or believe in the efficacy of a taxing authority to be generous on our behalf. I know a Christian dig is irresistible, and that viewing the world through one big government lens is simple, but there's nothing in SabresBills post that's not generous or Christian. He wants tax money to run the government. Me, too. I'd think before calling out someone's faith.

It'll have to be later. I'm at work. Before I elaborate, though, let me see if this cleans it up. My references to shifting right and shifting left were observations, not complaints or celebrations. There was talk during the Reagan years of a fundamental rightward shift in the electorate. The language was lower taxes, pro growth, judicial restraint, military strength. I, not alone, thought the shift had some staying power. "Reagan revolution, Blue Dog Democrats". I would say that after Reagan, and after a stretch of centrists from each party (Clinton, Bush I and II) the country's moved left. We have Democratic Socialist at #2 in one party, less retrained courts, national healthcare, and a military on a different posture than it was under Reagan. I'm not arguing one's better than the other. I have my views. I do, though, think we've shifted. Think about Kennedy's view of tax policy. It was aligned with "growth". Leadership language around tax policy today references social justice and greed. You may think this is progress. I don't. However, just debating is evidence of a shift. Again, I wasn't advocating good news or bad. I was born before the civil rights act. Alex

Random thoughts while wondering whatever happened to Kevin O'Shea .... I am surprised how poorly Governors are doing in the Republican polls. Bush leads at +/- 4%. Christie, Kasich, Huckabee and Pataki are below 3%. Jindal, Perry, and Walker are out. Who am I forgetting? O'Malley is my favorite Dem. Rabies is my favorite disease. Honest, it's not always like this. I would've considered Hillary vs McCain in a battle of "not my first eleven choices". No "leadership" nation with regard to the Middle East has the same objective as any other. There's little to lead other than the lesser of worst secondary objectives. Our President gave Russia a lecture, today. He has a style. I'll await Russia's changed behavior. People snickered at Mitt. Ted Cruz is coming, man. He's coming. Paris exposed Carson. Trump goes away (I know, I know, I've been predicting tomorrow for weeks). Ted's coming. Christie is growing on me. Rubio is young, smart, articulate and a conservative Senator. Reminds me of Jack Kennedy back when Dems were progressive in a world where Goldwater wasn't. The whole spectrum's shifted left. Back in 1990, I believed Reagan shifted it right. What'd I know. Cruz, Rubio, Christie and Fiorina will be the last four standing, in no particular order. I understand the upcoming climate summit will be a "powerful rebuke" to ISIS following the Parisian "setback". I'm hopeful. At least our goal, as of today, is to destroy ISIS. This may be more promising than containing the JayVee. Religious tests. How can you say that out loud no matter how badly you need to pander? Two knees jerking in unison. We need to take refugees because we're good. We need to refuse refugees because they're bad. Our refugee stance needs thoughtful consideration. Wouldn't Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states make a great home for Sunni refugees? Color me simple - wealth, Sunni culture, and skin in the game? Troops - I'm looking at you Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Jordan. I'd give guns to the Kurds, too. How come you can say "Islamic State" but not "radical Islam" when referring to the same perversion? Whomever's the next President will be inheriting a mess with US influence deminished, deliberate or not. We're there because I want gasoline and plastics. I'm the interests. I'm also hungry.

.... and, after that video montage, the other half does now, also ...

Half of America thinks Leodis McKelvin is a Monday Night Football kick return fumbling specialist.

When has Leodis ever made a bad play on a Monday night in New England with a kick return involved?

Points time. Time and points. I'm diggin' Darby so much this year.

The NFL ... Have you seen a bigger dollar business do more to ruin it's product?

Thought the same thing. Did I hear Gruden say it's not interference if the pass hits the DB?

Love Gorges putting that on net.

Yes, licking his visor.

Premature epostulation .... I'd love to see a Blues v Sabres playoff series. Laughing emoticon (beyond my capability).

No, no ... no Christmas references until the day AFTER Thanksgiving.

Great shout out on the St. Louis feed for MODO, the "Swedish hockey factory". Fun period. Clink, clink, bonk, ding.