The future of Israel

Kerry points out that a one-state Israel cannot be both Jewish and Democratic. The word he is not saying is "apartheid". The alternative conventional term, "occupation", implies a future two state solution, and every additional permanent settlement means Israel is moving away from "occupation" and toward "apartheid".

But there is a fourth possibility that Kerry's implied logic ignores. In a world that is moving away from high principle and towards self interest and nationalism, an isolated Israel could very well make good on the old zealous threat to push the Arabs into the sea (really Egypt) and the desert (Jordan and Syria). The only thing really stopping it from doing so is the loss of American support.

Ignore the man behind the curtain

Tillerson as Trump's proposed Secretary of State presents an interesting narrative to the 2016 campaign. He built his career at the world's largest oil company by enlisting Putin's help in exploiting Russia's massive reserves. He has been frustrated by sanctions against Russia for the invasion of Ukraine. Until now it has been a mystery why Trump has been so cozy with Putin, why Trump publicly asked the Russians to hack Hillary's emails, and why they complied.

At first I considered an oil CEO as Secretary of State to be an awkward but theoretical conflict of interest. But the more I learn, the more dangerous it seems.

As a reminder, Dick Cheney's former company, Halliburton, made up to $40B as a result of the Iraq war, which he orchestrated using faked intelligence. The man behind the curtain can be very dangerous indeed.

Replacing Obamacare

Republicans agree that Obamacare should be repealed and replaced, but there is little consensus on what should replace it. One thing everyone seems to be tiptoeing around is the individual mandate. It's quite unpopular. But if you get rid of it, and you don't penalize preexisting conditions, then people can sign up when they get sick. That's not how insurance works. (It's worth noting that employers have worked around this problem with open enrollment periods)

What's interesting to me is that Republicans are against Obamacare at all. It coerces money from taxpayers and individual enrollees and delivers it to corporations. Republicans' corporate constituents should be thrilled. But it has Obama's name, so Republicans have a lot invested against it. It will be a major test of their manipulative skills to see if they can convince their gullible minions that they should accept keeping the individual mandate.

Net neutrality for mobile?

On Thursday the FCC sent a letter to AT&T complaining about zero rating. Basically AT&T wants to let its wireless customers stream its DirecTV video service over its wireless network without counting that data against their monthly data caps. The FCC claims this violates net neutrality. I'm a big supporter of net neutrality for ISPs to homes, but apply it to mobile seems like an overreach. After all, it is easy to switch wireless providers if yours charges too much. The mobile industry is very competitive. The AT&T plan seems like the type of innovation that should be encouraged.

On the other hand, there is often little or no competition for the data connection to your house. You can't ask a homeowner to move if the ISP charges too much.

The problem is, AT&T serves both homes and mobile phones. And the content provider, in this case DirecTV, is owned by AT&T. And content providers don't care how the consumer views the content. Their bits go into the same network.

The only solution I can see is that net neutrality should apply to a network if it connects to homes. But that means AT&T would probably have to restructure.

Then again, the question is moot. In June Trump gets to nominate a Republican to fill a vacancy on the FCC, and net neutrality will die.

More net neutrality

I've written about net neutrality before. It is what I would call a litmus issue. You can tell if a politician represents consumers or predatory corporations by their position. Now that Trump has declared he is going to dismantle it, it's a good time to recap.

What is the difference between "00110101" and "10110111"? Not much of course. Your ISP can deliver either packet at equal cost. But if the first one comes from Netflix and the second from Google News, then people are willing to pay cash money for the first one, but not the second. To a corporation, the Netflix packet is GOLD! Your ISP, who owns the pipe to the consumers house, wants a cut of this action, like a troll under a bridge.

The laws of unfettered capitalism are harsh. Whoever owns the scarcest resource in a transaction gets the profit. In this case, the pipe to your house is a near monopoly, so in the absence of net neutrality, the ISP would get the profit. You might think the people who worked hard to create great entertainment should get the profit, but that's not how capitalism works.

Of course they can't charge the consumer directly for Netflix, that would be much too obvious. So they charge Netflix. Netflix has to pass that charge on to the consumer, but most consumers will just think Netflix is overcharging them.

The issue is abstract, so those who take a position have studied it themselves, or trust someone who has. Trump is proud of his ability to make decisions "intuitively", and his advisors are all Republicans. So this is really no surprise.

Trump and Putin

I wonder if Trump's phone call with Putin was awkward. "You said you would abandon NATO and you asked for my help getting Hillary's emails. I got you elected. What do I get?"

We'll see what Trump does next time Putin gets aggressive. You can be sure Putin will test us soon after the inauguration. Trump sold his soul to the devil, but maybe the contract is not enforceable.

To be honest, rolling over for our rivals seems to me to be very out of character for our little strongman.

Trump and the generals

Is no one else alarmed by Trump's statement that he would fire the top generals? If he gets to hand pick his generals, what would stop him from dissolving congress? He admires Putin and Saddam Hussein. After years of protests of a Trump presidency, some of which might turn violent, it won't seem so farfetched.

Tariffs

Trump has always been short on details, which makes him hard to attack. But at the Republican convention, he committed to one core platform that is easy to refute. He wants to roll back free trade. Of course he makes it sound so obvious. It will boost jobs for Americans. No doubt this is true. But there is a cost on the other side. Imports cost a lot more.

In the old days, only the rich could afford imports. Partly this was the result of the tariffs themselves, but mostly, importing stuff was expensive. So protectionism was popular. Nowadays, shipping is cheap and lots of the stuff ordinary people buy is imported. This is where Trump is vulnerable.

If you go to the store to buy a shirt made in the Philippines for $10, and a US manufacturer can only make a profit (and pay the CEO $20M/yr) if he can sell the same shirt for $20, then the CEO will ask Trump to impose a $10 tax on the imported shirts. Then to buy the shirt you have to pay the Philippines manufacturer $10 and pay the federal government $10. I guess if you are buying the US made shirt, the extra $10 goes to the CEO's salary. Either way the system is rigged.

Trump the attention seeker

Why does everyone seem to insist that the Trump campaign's many gaffes are a sign of incompetence? They are not. They are entirely calculated and deliberate. Trump is a spoiled child who compulsively needs to misbehave to gain attention.

If we elect such a person as commander in chief and leader of the free world, what could possibly go wrong?

Election prediction

Just for fun, here's my prediction for the presidential election:

1. Trump will not get a majority of Republican delegates.
2. Most of his delegates will jump on the second ballot. 
3. Cruz will pick up enough to get the nomination. 
4. Trump will run as an independent. 
5. No one will get enough electors to win. 
6. The House will elect Cruz.

Inflation 2015

Here's the fourth annual unscientific cdude inflation shopping cart.

Whole wheat bread, 24oz, store brand: $1.99
Gallon milk, whole, store brand: $1.99
Dozen eggs, large AA: $2.99
Campbell's chicken noodle soup: $0.88
Tomato sauce, 8 oz.: $0.35
2 decks playing cards: $3.49
Hyundai Accent: $14,745
Ground beef, 5 lb chub, 73% lean: 13.35 (estimated)
Beer, Budweiser, 18 cans: 17.49
Scott toilet tissue, 12 pack: 9.99
Tide liquid, 150 oz: 17.99

Lots of fluctuation this year. The average increase was -4.85%. The official rate is 0.5% (12 months ending November).