Thanks for Comments-Bill!
I received a fine comment by Bill D:
Bill is concerned that my article may not be a reliable source. First of all, I applaud Bill, because I'm a stickler about this issue--how many of us even think about the level of reliability of our information? I have purchased an Encyclopedia Brittanica and the related "Great Books" set because I wanted to have something available which I felt was researched in a very thoroughgoing way and which represented profound levels of solid information. . . I was not able to achieve all my goals with that purchase, but I feel that the effort is always worth it.
First of all, let me tell you that I'm certainly not anti-union. In fact I've had the application paper work here in my den for a couple of months now, to join a union here in LA. Now, I think I've been helped to get going on this. I'll report back once I actually join the union. . .
Here's how I feel about unions--they are quite helpful in certain circumstances. I've seen how they definitely helped my brother with some very life-and-death circumstances. But, I don't want to lie to anybody, I'm a fiscal conservative at the least (I have some moderate political views which would shock my full-on conservative buddies, so I don't usually mention them in social occasions).
Anyway, I don't think I can yet prove a full "nexus" between the concept of the "everyone wins" faction (they exist. . .Marvin has convinced me of that. . .and we pretty much know who they are. .) and the termination. In fact the stated reasons were for generalized "you are not doing a good job" kinda stuff. . .I'm trying to look beyond that, mostly because it seems absurd to me, once the decathlon is now paying its debts off, and is running competitions properly, that this would be the main reason.
So, to recap:
I'm conservative, but I'm not stupid--Unions do have a purpose and function--I'm sorry if I sounded "arch" in framing the statement, but I was trying to point out that we have a "blue" state here and yet, some are more inclined to try and "fix the system" than others. This is actually a fascinating study area in and of itself (see below).
I do appreciate help, but I believe in each individual's right to find their own information and to report it. . .that is really the heart of journalism. .
And, yes, I'm probably going to get comfortable with the idea that there will always be at least some slant to news articles. . .that's why I think Google News is great. . .I usually go through several different, related articles to find out any true impression about the events. . .and even then, I reserve judgement until more facts are in.
TWO DIMENSIONS INSTEAD OF ONE:
I read a very interesting article in a freebie "computer shopper" kind of mag once--the author posited that there are really two areas, or dimensions to "right wing" and "left wing". . .it is not enough to identify someone as being to the right or the left, but also to identfiy the extent to which they support "command and control" or on the opposite end. . ."laissez faire" or "hands off" approaches.
The author went on to place several names into a two-dimensional grid with some conservatives being more or less above or below the median line of control-orientedness (the upper half was more-control and the lower half was less-control). So Reagan was in the lower bottom right. . less-control and right politically. Interestingly, Clinton was in the lower left. . left politically, but somewhat averse to extensive command and control. . .others placed in any one of the four quadrants. . .
Interesting. . .I think what is missing in this, is the fact that political thought really is not very well analyzed in a "continuum-line" way. .Are the quasi-anarchist libertarians far right? . . .No? well, where do they go? They are for legalization of all drugs. . .isn't that essentially true? They want as little government as possible, so clearly they are very much in the bottom half, but it's hard to make a purely linear distinction when checking off issue after issue politically. . .
For example I'm very concerned about regulating anything when there exists the possibility, like during prohibition, that this will result in an "underground" market. . .so I don't always come up with the same answers my fellow conservatives do. .I'm very concerned about this effect, so I think this way most of the time. This can result in quite a few well-intentioned disagreements. .I've read about the Prohibition era extensively, and I understand this example of unintended consequences, quite well.
Stay tuned. . .
Chris Tune
PS
Oh! I'm quite a bit nearer the center, but in the same quadrant, as Ronald Reagan.
Bill is concerned that my article may not be a reliable source. First of all, I applaud Bill, because I'm a stickler about this issue--how many of us even think about the level of reliability of our information? I have purchased an Encyclopedia Brittanica and the related "Great Books" set because I wanted to have something available which I felt was researched in a very thoroughgoing way and which represented profound levels of solid information. . . I was not able to achieve all my goals with that purchase, but I feel that the effort is always worth it.
First of all, let me tell you that I'm certainly not anti-union. In fact I've had the application paper work here in my den for a couple of months now, to join a union here in LA. Now, I think I've been helped to get going on this. I'll report back once I actually join the union. . .
Here's how I feel about unions--they are quite helpful in certain circumstances. I've seen how they definitely helped my brother with some very life-and-death circumstances. But, I don't want to lie to anybody, I'm a fiscal conservative at the least (I have some moderate political views which would shock my full-on conservative buddies, so I don't usually mention them in social occasions).
Anyway, I don't think I can yet prove a full "nexus" between the concept of the "everyone wins" faction (they exist. . .Marvin has convinced me of that. . .and we pretty much know who they are. .) and the termination. In fact the stated reasons were for generalized "you are not doing a good job" kinda stuff. . .I'm trying to look beyond that, mostly because it seems absurd to me, once the decathlon is now paying its debts off, and is running competitions properly, that this would be the main reason.
So, to recap:
I'm conservative, but I'm not stupid--Unions do have a purpose and function--I'm sorry if I sounded "arch" in framing the statement, but I was trying to point out that we have a "blue" state here and yet, some are more inclined to try and "fix the system" than others. This is actually a fascinating study area in and of itself (see below).
I do appreciate help, but I believe in each individual's right to find their own information and to report it. . .that is really the heart of journalism. .
And, yes, I'm probably going to get comfortable with the idea that there will always be at least some slant to news articles. . .that's why I think Google News is great. . .I usually go through several different, related articles to find out any true impression about the events. . .and even then, I reserve judgement until more facts are in.
TWO DIMENSIONS INSTEAD OF ONE:
I read a very interesting article in a freebie "computer shopper" kind of mag once--the author posited that there are really two areas, or dimensions to "right wing" and "left wing". . .it is not enough to identify someone as being to the right or the left, but also to identfiy the extent to which they support "command and control" or on the opposite end. . ."laissez faire" or "hands off" approaches.
The author went on to place several names into a two-dimensional grid with some conservatives being more or less above or below the median line of control-orientedness (the upper half was more-control and the lower half was less-control). So Reagan was in the lower bottom right. . less-control and right politically. Interestingly, Clinton was in the lower left. . left politically, but somewhat averse to extensive command and control. . .others placed in any one of the four quadrants. . .
Interesting. . .I think what is missing in this, is the fact that political thought really is not very well analyzed in a "continuum-line" way. .Are the quasi-anarchist libertarians far right? . . .No? well, where do they go? They are for legalization of all drugs. . .isn't that essentially true? They want as little government as possible, so clearly they are very much in the bottom half, but it's hard to make a purely linear distinction when checking off issue after issue politically. . .
For example I'm very concerned about regulating anything when there exists the possibility, like during prohibition, that this will result in an "underground" market. . .so I don't always come up with the same answers my fellow conservatives do. .I'm very concerned about this effect, so I think this way most of the time. This can result in quite a few well-intentioned disagreements. .I've read about the Prohibition era extensively, and I understand this example of unintended consequences, quite well.
Stay tuned. . .
Chris Tune
PS
Oh! I'm quite a bit nearer the center, but in the same quadrant, as Ronald Reagan.
Comments