Analytics

Saturday, October 26, 2013

Miscellany: 10/26/13

Quote of the Day
Patriots always talk of dying for their country
and never of killing for their country.
Bertrand Russell

Image of the Day

Courtesy of Statism is Slavery
ObamaCare Roundup
  • Rant of the Day. Cavuto is spot on and priceless in his obvious mockery reprising Bentsen's 1988 rebuke of Quayle whom predictably name-dropped JFK during their VP debate.

  • Security Concerns. There are several extrinsic and intrinsic security risks to the application. Some involve questions about poorly screened/trained ObamaCare "navigators" (to facilitate signups of the unininsured), many of whom seem to be resurrected remnants of ACORN, the bankrupted scandal-ridden "community organizer" group which saw a number of 2008 election-fraud member convictions. This raises a significant risk of potential identity fraud. (Personnel could collect privileged information and share/sell it to identity thieves.) This is a serious enough concern that over a dozen state attorneys warned HHS Secretary Sebelius, and related Congressional inquiries have been stonewalled. In an earlier post, I already described how social security number data had been unwittingly shared with insurers. Then there are the "cyber-squatters", with similar website addresses to the government website collecting sensitive data from unsuspecting visitors. More serious than the notorious sign-up issues (see CNN clip below) are the internal security concerns--which even on a cursory check showed several risks from unnecessary revelations of software used with known vulnerabilities and documentation of application components to less sophisticated logon procedures. Some experts guesstimate maybe 20% of the application may need to revamped and require up to a year to test; others recommend a complete overhaul. Let me say that a government entity trying to coordinate the efforts of literally dozens of contractor agencies is simply not up to the task, and I've found even modestly complex projects like ERP upgrades can take up to 6 months or longer (particularly there are customized components). I've been involved in database security audits involving dozens of fixes and weeks to resolve. In this case, it's difficult to estimate because a lot depends on whether best practices were followed (and certainly the logon problem above alone makes it difficult to believe); if not, one will need to expand white-boxing more of the application and compliance testing will accordingly be extended. That's why some experts are advising scrubbing the status quo. I am skeptical this can be done within target dates discussed to date; even if you throw resources at a problem, I respond with a simple analogy: adding more cooks in the kitchen won't make the eggs boil any faster.  The logon problems can be easily fixed; the application security problems are more serious. I can tell you interface problems are just the tip of the iceberg. The inference is that if they didn't do due diligence in interface design, what confidence do we have in the underlying system itself?
  • Yesterday I described the Achilles heel of ObamaCare to be the mandate for young and/or healthy people to pay above the cost of their own risk pool to subsidize the 36-110M people with preexisting conditions. Here is an extract from an investment newsletter website: "A limited plan under the Affordable Care Act will cost a healthy 26-year old upwards of $5,800 a year. ut according to a search of eHealthInsurance.com, that same 26 year-old living in Cleveland, Ohio, can purchase an Anthem SmartSense Plus plan for $89.45 per month — that’s $1,073 per year — right now..Will those people decide to buy coverage, or pay a penalty that’s as low as $95 the first year? Let me ask you. If you were 26 years old and healthy would you pay 5- to 6-times what you currently pay for something you rarely use?"
  • Speaker Boehner Shares Constituent ObamaCare Woes.
  • Some CNN Clps





Facebook Corner

(via LFC) I Love your page I've learned so much from you. I was hoping you could write a post on some thoughts about trade with China. I presume you support complete open trading with them? Honestly I'm having a difficult time reconciling my belief in free trade with my disgust with China, not to mention their currency manipulation and poisoned products. If liberty is about doing what you want without infringing on other people's natural rights, isn't it wrong to do business with a country like this? Please stop my confusion headache! 
First of all, given the way that the Fed prints money and manipulates interest rates, we are the last ones whom should be complaining about currency manipulation. Look at how much the purchasing power of the dollar has dropped during the century the Fed has been in existence. Any kind of acceptable inflation (even the current target of 2%) undermines the dollar. Second, what China needs to do to retain its peg is soak up a lot of dollars, which is why they are holding so much US debt and buying US assets. Buying US debt keeps yields low; lower interest rates facilitate economic growth vs. recession. Third, China has been slowly but surely been relaxing its peg to the dollar and has been vastly expanding its gold reserves to back its own currency. Finally, Don Boudreaux of Cafe Hayek has written several good articles debunking this contrived economic populism red herring. The bottom line is,when foreign competition makes goods or services cheap, the consumer is better off, because he can stretch his dollars; American competitors need to innovate and drive their costs lower to compete globally. If anyone is inconvenienced by a Chinese currency peg, it's the Chinese consumer and/or businesses dependent on foreign resources, paying more than they have to. Bottom line: don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

(via Libertarian Republic). The state of Kansas is going after the sperm donor for a child to a lesbian couple whom split up after the girl's birth. First, I give my opinion, and then I comment in a related thread.
 "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." This is absolutely ludicrous; the state is trying to ex post facto deny the validity of a contract, a violation of his economic rights. If such agreements were not prohibited at the time of the transaction, they should be valid. How could the lawyer handling the contract not known such a contract would not be binding in Kansas? At minimum, he would have violated professional ethics, and the man would not have knowingly consented to the transaction. It seems clear that the people who materially bonded with the child and have been financially responsible for the child have an ongoing obligation to the child.
Gay marriage would NOT have changed this. The only reason a husband is considered a "legal" father is because he can BIOLOGICALLY be the father. If you automatically make a gay spouse the legal parent, that is the state effectively terminating the rights of the outside biological parent without consent or due process. Terminating the rights of a parent without their consent or due process is not a libertarian principle either. This couple would have still had to go through legal channels to terminate the biological parent's rights and make the same sex parent the "parent" either by adoption or by termination of the donor's rights. What would have changed this is changing Kansas' adoption laws.
[Discussant] is wrong; it would be true if the man hadn't knowingly renounced his parental rights. As I recall, a non-biological father can also be sued for support.

(via LFC) "There were 108,592,000 people in the United States in the fourth quarter of 2011 who were recipients of one or more means-tested government benefit programs, the Census Bureau said in data released this week. Meanwhile, according to the Census Bureau, there were 101,716,000 people who worked full-time year round in 2011. That included both private-sector and government workers."
And I seem to recall 1 of every 6 or so make their living in the public sector...

(via Drudge Report). NSA surveillance is being protested. A discussant mocks that the NSA is targeting protesters.
"Knowledge is power": the spies are usually more effective when the masses are clueless. Don't forget--this is more about the growth of parasitic bureaucracy; these are the same incompetents whom can't even spell surnames correctly re: the underwear bomber and the Boston Marathon terrorists.

 (via LFC and SIS). There is an image criticizing the government's meddling with marriage.
I have never understood why libertarians are obsessed with having the state bless "gay marriage". This seems more about positive vs. negative rights, the traditional libertarian concern. As long as you have the right to freely associate without state interference, to assert your contractual rights (inheritance), etc.

(via Drudge). A Daily Caller piece revealing the amateurish ObamaCare website was the product of a no-bid contract to an Obama crony.
Wait for the White House to spin this as a "market failure": "We didn't build that...."

(Via LFC: caption this photo of Austrian School economist Bob Murphy and Ron Paul)
 "What will Yellen do? Advise Obama to emulate FDR again and order confiscation of gold?"

(SIS). Moderator discussed dealing with a socialist professor whom he was convinced docked him a letter grade over his different political views.
As a former professor, not part of the 85% or so "progressive" professors in academia, I learned to keep my mouth shut. "Academic freedom" is largely a myth, with hypocritical double standards, particularly when you're a junior untenured faculty member. Most professors I know were professionally ethical; I myself was scrupulously objective in grading ; I issued A's to students I didn't like and remember failing a student whom I did like.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Glenn Foden and Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Ipod Shuffle Series

Bonnie Tyler, "Total Eclipse of the Heart". This is a classic Steinman tune with a spectacular arrangement. Steinman has penned many Meat Loaf classics; there was some fallout between Meat Loaf's record company and Steinman, and the song went to Tyler, otherwise known for "It's a Heartache". Her raspy blue-eyed soulful voice fits the song like a glove. This is one of those songs which won me over the first time I ever heard it