The Housing Anti-Terrorist Act 0f 2006 (HAT Act) (May 8, 2006)

Posted in Foreign Policy, Housing on May 8, 2006 by e-commentary.org

The housing stock for the next half century is under construction today.  Americans are building Taj Mahals they will not be able to own or heat or cool.  Today’s McMansions are typically constructed with 2 inch by 4 inch wood studs rather than 2 inch by 6 inch wood studs.  A 2 by 4 house is insulated with R-11 insulation whereas a 2 by 6 house is insulated with much warmer R-19 insulation.  The higher the R value, the greater the insulation value.  In addition, a 2 by 6 house with a generous nailing pattern is more likely to resist earthquakes which are predicted to surface in unexpected places in the near future.

The country is acquiring much of its energy from unfriendly regimes.  We as a country must reduce the funding of our enemies.  Proper house construction practices should be part of the war on terrorism.  The market should be the starting point of every economic debate.  The market is failing.  Government involvement, the ending point of every economic debate, is necessary.  In the past, housing construction companies were local enterprises.  National companies such as Pulte Homes and Tull Brothers are among the larger builders.  They should be enlisted in this campaign.  One builder may be reluctant to take the lead because there is an added cost with benefits that may not be immediately apparent to the consumer.  All of the builders may be willing to follow one set practice.  This single simple practice would produce tremendous positive long term consequences for the country.       

[Next consideration – Converting cargo containers into cottages] 

May Day (May 1, 2006)

Posted in Law, Society on May 1, 2006 by e-commentary.org

May 1 is May Day.  This is Law Day, a day to reflect on our heritage of liberty, justice and equality under the law and to celebrate the rule of law in a democracy.  Hundreds of years ago in England, a homeowner behind on his (not her) mortgage could pay the arrears on May 1 and avoid a foreclosure.  This is also International Workers Day.  Workingmen of the world unite and celebrate their rights.  This is also Labor Day in Mexico.  Hispanics are laboring this day by boycotting work and business in support of the first National Day Without Immigrants.  Today is also “Mission Impossible” Day in the United States, a day of mourning to decry Emperor Bush’s proclamation: “Mission Accomplished.”  That it isn’t.  Busy day.

McMansions and the (Extended) Family of Tomorrow (April 24, 2006)

Posted in Economics, Housing, Society on April 24, 2006 by e-commentary.org

McMansions are littering the landscape.  Monoliths that consume space and resources.  Some McStructures are not even finished on the inside because the goal is to loom large when viewed from the outside.  “Potemkin Estates.”  The larger structures demand increasingly expensive hvac systems (heating ventilation and air conditioning systems).      

Kids are returning home, with and without jobs, and flopping in their former bedroom or on the couch in the basement.  They are “failing to launch.”  The kids can’t afford a home even if they can find a job.  Some parents charge rent or require contributions for food and utilities.  This relationship may develop into a permanent and positive lifestyle.  Extended families may pool their talents and grow old together in one mega-structure.  One sibling may be a single parent; the others can help raise the kids/grandkids.  One sibling may go and come at unusual times to juggle two part-time jobs in the craven new economy.  There will be no retirement, no social security, and no long-term health care, so the kids will be expected to take care of their parents in this assisted-living situation.  The home theater room will be remodeled into another bedroom.  Situation comedies (tragedies?) on the tv relocated to its traditional home in the den will chronicle the exploits of the new mega-nuclear family.  The McMansion could bring families together in unexpected ways.

The Virtues of an Iraqi Civil War (April 17, 2006)

Posted in Bush, Iraq, Military on April 17, 2006 by e-commentary.org

The United States was not required to engage in a domestic dispute war in 1860.  The Union forces could have prevented the expansion of slavery in the West by establishing garrisons along the border between the slave-holding states and the frontier.  The Navy could have embargoed trade with the South on the seas to the east and in the area now known as the Gulf of Mexico while also protecting other legitimate commerce and asserting the young nation’s sovereignty.  The South would have withered in a dozen years rather than being obliterated in four.  However, a President really only has the four-year term to resolve the matter.  The Union elected to “destroy the village in order to save it.”  A civil war defines a people.  The War Between the States or the War of Northern Aggression or however it is described is one of the major events that defined America and its people.  There are some who are still fighting the conflict.

“Over values men will fight.”  This rallying cry was shouted not by Ernesto “Che” Guevara but by Milton “Free Market” Friedman, the great contemporary conservative economist and philosopher.  The peoples in the present country of Iraq may elect to fight to determine their borders, their identities and their values.  There may be many deaths.  Men fighting over values often kill.  The killing is often unfair, random, ruthless, and indiscriminate.  The men kill far too many women and children.  The tumult is spreading over the region.  The Shiites in Iraq may ally with the Shiites in Iran.  Others may join the fray.  The United States can only make the situation worse.  

The Iraqi peoples need to determine their destiny without American involvement and meddling.  The United States should not play policeman or baby sitter.  The Iraqi people must determine their fate.  Support our troops . . . return . . . now.     

“A Man’s Home Is His Gated Community” (April 10, 2006)

Posted in Housing, Law, Society, Supreme Court on April 10, 2006 by e-commentary.org

“A man’s home is his castle.”  This maxim reflects a fundamental social and economic compact in Anglo-American law.  All of us agree to treat each other’s home as if it were a castle which frees each of us to do something more productive than to defend one’s home 24/7/365.  A land of fortified castles is far less efficient and creative than a land of homes and businesses respected by all of us.

The recent Supreme Court case of Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. ___ (2006), threatened to depart in a small way from this cornerstone of the Constitution.  The Court addressed whether the police can search a home without a warrant when one occupant gives consent but another objects.  The wife allowed the police to enter and search the home despite the objection of her husband who co-inhabited the residence.  Other prior cases had allowed the police to enter if consent was given by the one inhabitant who was present.  By a 5 to 3 decision, the Supreme Court rejected the search as unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment and invalid as to him.  A man’s and a woman’s home is their castle not just his or her castle.

Some of those who are concerned about crime seek to expand the “castle doctrine,” a corollary to the “castle rule” that allows a person to use force including deadly force to protect oneself and others from attack.  There is a countervailing “duty to retreat” under some circumstances.  The “castle doctrine” has been expanding in recent years to allow one to pursue a possible assailant.  The legislatures and courts must balance these concerns with care.

Gated communities are expanding in many regions of the Republic.  The communities represent a rejection of the “castle compact” and a return to castles with gates and guards rather than draw bridges and moats.  The denizens have their own private McFortress within the larger compound.  They send their kids to private schools in equally guarded enclaves detached from the public.  Their shelters shelter them from ordinary activities.  The reaction is not entirely surprising in the face of criminal activity.  However, the moated communities are changing the landscape and lifestyle of America.

The Arithmetic of Hope (April 3, 2006)

Posted in Economics, PATRIOT Act, Politics, USA PATRIOT Act on April 3, 2006 by e-commentary.org

1 Senator voted against the UnPatriot Act when it was initially passed.

36 Senators voted against the nomination of Alberto Gonzales.

44 senators voted against the nomination of Samuel Alito.

48 Senators voted against increasing the debt ceiling to nine (9) Trillion dollars.

(On August 7, 1964, 2 Senators voted against the “Gulf of Tonkin Resolution,” Ernest Gruening of Alaska and Wayne Morse of Oregon.)

The “Bush Doctrine” in Foreign Policy (March 27, 2006)

Posted in Bush, Foreign Policy on March 27, 2006 by e-commentary.org

Bush’s recent “National Security Report” discusses the “pre-emptive war strategy” which allows him to engage in wars of “self-offense.”  Parsed out, there are two precepts to the “Bush Doctrine” in foreign policy:

1)      I will invade a country based on my whims, demons, anxieties, and insecurities if someone looks at me wrong whether military action promotes the security and well-being of America or not.  I will invade based on lies and distortions that I will repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat.  I will spill any blood and spend any bullion in the name of my invasion without regard to the consequences.

2)      I will not invade a country that possesses nuclear weapons.

The Bush doctrine is counter-productive and ultimately suicidal.  His avowed war aims compel other countries to commit all of their resources to the development of nuclear weapons.  North Korea is not a target because it has some nascent and is developing more nuclear weapons.  Iran is a target because it does not yet have nuclear weapons.  (Iran is not helping its case with the aggressive rhetoric.)  Bush’s repudiation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty removes some legal limits on nuclear proliferation.  The Bush Doctrine is a Nuclear Proliferation Act. 

Reagan understood the insanity of a nuclear war.  Bush is committed to starting one. 

The (Unreal) March Madness (March 20, 2006)

Posted in Iraq, Military on March 20, 2006 by e-commentary.org

On March 19, 2003, Bush unilaterally declared World War III.  Three years have passed, almost 2300 U.S. troops are dead, and nearly $300,000,000,000.00 ($300 Billion) is being looted from unborn Americans to fund the daily costs.  The long-term economic costs (more grenades; long-term health care) of Operation Iraqi Liberation may reach 3 Trillion, not counting the psychological toll on all Americans.  Bush’s recent “National Security Report” declares “America is at war.”  A war Bush triggered. 

After September 11, 2001, the American people wanted revenge.  Bush gladly obliged.  The country deserved focused leadership to confront unknown, dangerous and organized threats.  The response should have been carefully considered and comprehensive diplomatic and military efforts.  Bush nurtured some ill-defined animosity toward Iraq and launched the Crusades for no good reason and many bad ones.  By April 1, 2003, Bush should have realized that the U.S. military defeat of the Iraqi Cub Scouts did not prove a point or advance an interest.  We were fooled again.  By then, the military was mired down and served only to provide a common enemy to unite the three warring factions (Kurds, Sunnis, Shiites) in a campaign to repel the American invaders.  The three factions now seem capable of conducting a civil war while driving out the invaders.  Bush’s Crusades have drawn attention and resources away from the real threats and undermined America’s military options in other countries and regions.  The exeunt from Iraq may require intervention by others, perhaps by an emboldened international coalition challenging the rogue American nation.  In the next phase of WW III, the theater may move to Iran.  March Madness continues.

Dubai Ports World: The Ship Storm (March 13, 2006)

Posted in Economics, Foreign Policy, Market Solutions on March 13, 2006 by e-commentary.org

America and its allies must encourage other countries, particularly Arab countries, to embrace capitalism and participate in the world economy.  The most competitive economic player, Dubai Ports World, was set to take over terminal operations at some of America’s busiest ports.  Bush could have done a more nuanced job anticipating the reaction and introducing the development to the American people.  The reaction of many Americans to the sale was unfortunate but not surprising.  Leaders, however, should lead, not pander.  The one time in recent memory when the Democrats and Republicans in Congress stood up to Bush was the one time when they should have stood tall with him.  Two of the 9/11 terrorists appear to have had connections to Dubai.  There is less chance of an attack on an American port by someone from Dubai if someone from Dubai is assisting in operating it.  Free trade and economic interdependence promote peace.  America made an egregious mistake and forfeited a promising opportunity to build an economic link to the Arab world.  America committed a self-inflicted terrorist act by burning a bridge it should have built.

Support Our Troops . . . Return (March 6, 2006)

Posted in Iraq, Military on March 6, 2006 by e-commentary.org

[A Zogby poll last week found that even the troops support our troops return.]

“At least in Vietnam, Bush had an exit strategy.”  In Iraq, Bush never even had a viable entrance strategy.  In Vietnam, two countries divided by colonists sought to unite into one people, despite Johnson’s and Nixon’s wishes.  In Iraq, three people inhabiting one nation concocted by colonists seek to divide into three countries, despite Bush’s wishes.  America should refrain from imposing its ill-fated whims upon the world when neither the security nor well-being of the United States or its allies is at stake.  Self-determination is a Wilsonian principle.  Let the Iraqis decide.  Support our troops . . . return.  The emerging fear this week is that the troops will be deployed to Iran rather than repatriated to America.