Because nothing says class like larger than life (?) Hello Kitty sculptures, mysteriously featured outside of the W Hotel in South Beach. Rusty too.
Heading back to DC first thing in the morning with deadlines a loomin'. On the plus side, I'll be reunited with Stanley.
I have a question -- why does Matt Yglesias think that Barack Obama is not opposed to offshoring of American jobs? And why does he seem to suggest that it's preposterous to view offshoring -- at least in some circumstances -- as immoral. He raises the issue of Toyota and BMW setting up production facilities in the U.S. and whether anyone would object to that? Well, I think there is a fundamental difference between setting up a production facility in a place where your product is being sold versus sending jobs overseas -- to have your product reimported back into the U.S. -- in order to take advantage of incredibly cheap labor.
And yes, I actually do have a problem with BMW -- they set up their facility in rat-bastard, right to shirk South Carolina, instead of place where their facility would be unionized as they are back in Germany. Mercedes has followed suit in Alabama and now Airbus seems ready to do the same. It's more than a little galling to watch the American South serve as some kind of glorified third world production facility for German enterprise to exploit.
Let me assure Matt -- and the villagers whose sentiments he seem to echo -- that most Americans strongly object to offshoring and view it as an attempt to drive down American wages and the middle class standard of living that was once viewed as synonymous with the greatness of this country.
On a different, but in some ways similar note, next to Glenn Kessler, I think the member of the Washington smugocracy I'd most like to knee in the nuts is Matt's buddy Tyler Cowen. His piece on Medicaid in the New York Times today is notable for its complete inattention to the issue of the uninsured. This guy is the most overpaid, underworked state employee this side of Glenn Reynolds.
What say you?
Tyler Cowen is about as loathesome as you can get. Somebody should do a greatest hits on that tool. I love how he compares healthcare to having status, and that's what people really want.
Posted by: Joe S | July 15, 2012 at 11:17 PM
well, that fountain is just weird. which i guess is intended, because it's all about irony. the artist sized-up and recreated a toy using foam-core, then cast it in bronze, then painted it white so it would look like the foam-core reproduction. except rusty. which is ironic. so sir charles, just by standing next to the sculpture, is blessed by the hipness. it would be more ironic if he was wearing, say, an aloha shirt, but perhaps he was unprepared for the moment. ;)
Posted by: kathy a. | July 16, 2012 at 12:03 AM
Joe,
He is an arrogant clueless clown. Why he is considered somewhat that Matt and Ezra would ever cite to is beyond me.
kathy,
Although you cannot really see it, I am wearing a "Drink Liberally" T-shirt, which seems appropriate for the setting.
Also interesting to see at the W was a fairly large contingent of Muslim women wearing head scarves and long sleeves. What they make of Miami Beach, where the style of dress is immodest to say the least -- as I noted to my wife the other night, it's very hard to tell the pros from the amateurs there -- I would be curious to know.
I was horrified when I looked at this post on my iphone and the magnificent photo was turned sideways.
Posted by: Sir Charles | July 16, 2012 at 08:41 AM
Tyler Cowen is also a wretchedly bad writer. His book "The Great Stagnation" was appallingly incoherent at every level.
Posted by: Morzer | July 16, 2012 at 08:51 AM
...The reason America's elite finds itself under so much criticism is not that they are elites. It is that they have become self-serving, accountability-free elites. Romney's pique that he could even be challenged to take responsibility for a company of which he was legally CEO is a perfect symbol of this abdication of responsibility. Think of the contrast with his father - a man who actually ran an industrial business well, who expressed solidarity with the civil rights movement when so many didn't, released twelve years of tax returns to prove he wasn't gaming anything, and invited reporters in for a Sunday service at his local LDS church.
George Romney clearly felt that with great wealth comes great responsibility and accountability. Mitt is fine with the wealth part; just not the responsibility and accountability. Which is a pretty good summary of what has gone wrong with American conservatism today.
Posted by: oddjob | July 16, 2012 at 12:11 PM
oddjob - one of my recurring thoughts lately has been that I could tolerate rule by the 1% (or 0.1%, or 0.01%, or whatever it really is) if they were at least doing a halfdecent job of it. But really, they're not even doing a good job on their own behalf, let alone ours.
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | July 16, 2012 at 01:12 PM
But really, they're not even doing a good job on their own behalf
I find it most ironic that Mitt's opposed to following the standard of tax return transparency set by his father, in 1968.
Posted by: oddjob | July 16, 2012 at 01:23 PM
Remember, it's supposedly wrong for unions to campaign for other unions. Colluding, and all.
Or something. I don't really understand it, honestly. It's not like unions are saying that the price must be X no matter local conditions; like a price collusion would; it's more like filing an amicus brief or boycotting products or services.
I think Matt's wrong, but he trades on saying these things to challenge us. We gotta prove him wrong and get a me culpa from him.
Posted by: Crissa | July 16, 2012 at 05:08 PM
Crissa,
I think you are thinking of the prohibition on secondary boycotts under the Taft-Hartley Act -- a prohibition that has done grave harm to unions.
Basically, what that means is that I cannot try to induce other unions and their members from dealing with company A in order to put pressure on company B. So for instance, if I am a bricklayers union and a general contractor has hired a non-union brick company to work on a job where all of the other crafts are unionized, I am not allowed to pressure the general contractor not to deal with the non-union brick company. If I set up a picket line -- which in the old days would have induced all of the other crafts to walk off the job in solidarity with me -- the general contractor can set up what is called a "reserve gate" strictly for the employees of the non-union brick company and that is the only place I may then picket. All of the other crafts will then go through other gates and be kept away from my pickets. If I move picketers in an attempt to draw the allegiance of other crafts and compel the general contractor to get rid of the non-union company, I have engaged in a secondary boycott and may be liable for damages.
Basically you cannot picket a second employer in order to bring pressure on the employer you are targeting -- as a result you cannot really call upon the solidarity of other unions to amplify your bargaining power.
Posted by: Sir Charles | July 16, 2012 at 05:56 PM
Corker of TN, Shelby of AL and McConnell of KY joined DeMint of SC in fighting vociferously against the original auto bailout. It's funny that all four states have non-American auto company production facilities located within their borders, don't you think?
Posted by: Linkmeister | July 16, 2012 at 06:55 PM
Linkmeister,
Surely just a coincidence.
Such scumbags. I really never thought I'd see the day where any politicians were actively trying to kill an American industry.
Posted by: Sir Charles | July 16, 2012 at 08:26 PM
No, but the prohibition is what stems from that conservative concept.
But I come across this constantly as I say corporations shouldn't get to spend additional money for people in campaigns... So then I get linked to union activities and told that's people colluding in the marketplace.
Posted by: Crissa | July 16, 2012 at 08:57 PM
Crissa,
At common law unions were treated as criminal conspiracies, so you are correct that were perceived as colluding in the market place. That view, in many ways, continued in the legal world until the 1930s.
Posted by: Sir Charles | July 16, 2012 at 09:08 PM
Anybody else catch Tyler Cowan's comment (re the ACA) that we should just accept that poor people are going to die earlier than richer people? That's the kind of moral degeneracy that a mindless devotion to libertarian philosophy will get you.
Sir C, "DC smugocracy" is giving me an intense case of dammit-why-didn't-I-think of that envy.
As for the pic...words fail me.
Posted by: beckya57 | July 16, 2012 at 10:47 PM
That's the kind of moral degeneracy that a mindless devotion to libertarian philosophy will get you.
I got mine. Sucks to be you.
Posted by: oddjob | July 17, 2012 at 09:09 AM
USA is experiencing its biggest drought since 1956.
Posted by: oddjob | July 17, 2012 at 09:12 AM
I believe Mitt Romney when he says that he played no role in running Bain Capital’s activities, even though he was listed as chief executive. After all, didn’t he handle his last two years as governor that way?
- Harold Kushner, Natick, MA
A letter to the editor in today's Boston Globe, and yes, it really was like that.
Posted by: oddjob | July 17, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Former Gov. & White House Chief of Staff John Sununu embarrassing the Romney campaign by letting his racist freak flag fly a little too highly.
That brilliant idiot (MIT graduate & all) left the George H. W. Bush White House under less than ideal circumstances. You'd think the Romney Campaign might have remembered that and found a way not to rely on the jackass.
Posted by: oddjob | July 17, 2012 at 01:20 PM
"He [John McCain] said he chose Palin [over Romney or Pawlenty] “because we thought that Sarah Palin was the better candidate.”"
I'm not sure I can think of a better insight into what's wrong with today's Republican Party.
Posted by: oddjob | July 17, 2012 at 01:27 PM
OJ--
Yes, it really was like that and I say thank goodness! Think of all the additional damage he could have done to the infrastructure of Massachusetts if he had been around to do it. If he wins the election, we better hope he focuses his attention elsewhere.
Posted by: Paula B | July 17, 2012 at 02:03 PM
montana wants to know: Do you support the Montana initiative that says corporations are not entitled to constitutional rights? online poll.
Posted by: kathy a. | July 17, 2012 at 05:59 PM
Many of us won't see these ads. This one is heartwrenching. Build that stage.
Oddjob, that does sum it up succinctly. I've often wondered, were it not for Palin, would we have had the Tea Party?
kathy a. -- I both voted and tweeted, (see Prup, it has its charms) and the 90/10 split is encouraging. Tester, I think, should be OK. Owns guns, has a crewcut and no doubt a real Montana truck with gun rack. It will be interesting to see the NRA figure out what to do.
Posted by: nancy | July 17, 2012 at 07:51 PM
nancy,
That "Build that Stage" ad seems like it might resonate among white working class voters in places like Ohio.
Posted by: Sir Charles | July 18, 2012 at 12:11 PM