Screwed By Microsoft - Again

For the past week and a half I have been swimming upstream trying to make my Framework 1.1 application talk to (use) some 3rd party components written in Framework 2.0 and 3.5.

Yes! I know that everyone knows that Framework 1.1 and other Frameworks are like oil and water. Microsoft simply says "Upgrade your application". However, for business reasons that is impossible because:

1. More than a million lines of code are involved.
2. The "automatic" converter ran for almost 48 hours and still reported nearly ten thousand anomalies - so much for automation.
3. Even if it could be converted, the entire application would need to be retested by QA. And, everyone knows that testing may show the presence of defects but never guarantee their absence.
4. Our customers would then need to be convinced (cajoled, prodded, or bribed) to upgrade their systems and everyone knows that customers don't like to change.

Whatever, happened to the COM/DCOM rule (advocated by Microsoft) that says that once you publish an interface you cannot change it? Well, there was a BIG change between Framework 1.1 and 2.0 that "broke" many many interfaces.

I guess that when you get big like Microsoft you can get away with being arrogant.

Who's Not Paying the Bills?

I recently came across some information that would confirm what I've been thinking - that Corporations aren't pulling their own weight when it comes to paying our bills.

Prior to 1980, corporations were taxed at a rate of more than 40%. Since that time, they have been paying less and less in the form of taxes until now the rate is only about 20%; or half of what they used to pay.

During the same period, Federal revenues derived from corporations plummeted while the national debt began to soar.

You will also note that revenues derived from individual income taxes has changed very little. In proportion, individuals now provide the bulk of Federal revenue. It hardly seems fair.

Of course without the corporate revenues, the debt is guaranteed to fall short unless there were spending cuts to offset the shortfall. The national debt has increased almost in direct proportion to the amount of the corporate shortfall.

The sad part is that Federal spending is totally out of control! The revenues derived from taxes come nowhere close to paying the bills. More than half of what the government spends isn't paid for - it is borrowed!

It should be obvious to even the casual observer that the real problem is "spending" not "revenues". Even if one tripled the amount collected from corporations, the amount of revenue collected from individuals would still be greater. Borrowing would still overwhelm either source of revenue and the "death spiral" of escalating debt would continue.

How clear a picture needs to be painted? Will Congress ever see that they MUST stop spending what they do not have?

I'm For Me First

I can't get over how many people think that if there is anything wrong in their life that someone else is responsible or that someone else will fix it. Whatever happened to the original American Spirit? This nation was made strong by people who took control of their own destiny and just did what needed to be done.

Too often when a kid gets a bad grade in school, they blame the teacher, the school, the book or whatever. Never themselves.

If one has an accident in their car, they look to their lawyer to get something from the other party, even if it was their own fault.

How many young people these days actually get a job and work to buy their car. Or do their parents "gift" it to them? Same goes for expensive cells phones and monthly wireless charges.

So far as I'm concerned, no more "I want mine. And, I want it now!" Nobody owes anybody anything. If you want it, go work for it. You'll appreciate what you have ever so much more if you earn it.

Creeping Meatballism

"Creeping Meatballism" was coined as a phrase by radio personality Jean Shepherd in an article written for Mad Magazine (April 1957). It described an attitude exhibited by far too many of the people of today. He warned us 54 years ago. We should have listened.

Eisenhower's Warning

Considering the pervasive influence of government in today's society, I have had cause to reflect on the phophetic words of former President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Following are some quoted excerpts from his famous speech warning about the power of the Military-Industrial complex. The words still ring true today.

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

"Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades. In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

"Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity [and academic integrity]. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

"The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

"Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite."

Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

[added by the Author of this Blog]

Liberty and Equality

Many believe that America was conceived in the philosophy of "All men are created equal" as stated in the Declaration of Independence. The civil rights movement and much of modern politics seek Equality as if it were some kind of Holy Grail.

There are many kinds of equality; among them are: egalitarianism, equal justice, equal opportunity, equality of outcome, as well as gender, racial, and social equality. In short, equality means different things to different people. No matter which type of equality appeals to you, there is an irreconcilable conflict between equality and liberty.

Alexander Hamilton said, "Inequality will exist as long as liberty exists. It unavoidably results from that very liberty itself".

Our founding fathers were not seeking Equality when they created our country. They were seeking Liberty. Freedom from outside compulsion or coercion. Freedom to behave according to their own free will and to be responsible for their own actions.

Let's look at the words of the Declaration more closely. The full text of the Equality clause is: "That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".

When Jefferson wrote these words, he merely simplified the words of James Mason's draft of a bill of rights that was adopted in Virginia as the "basis and foundation" of government. "That all Men are by Nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent Rights of which when they enter into a State of Society, they cannot, by any Compact, deprive or divest their Posterity; namely, the Enjoyment of Life and Liberty with the Means of acquiring and possessing Property, and pursuing and obtaining Happiness and Safety" .

From this we can see that the Declaration of Independence does not say that all men are equal. It says that they were created equal. And, there the equality ends. Once born, every man is then free to pursue their own goals and ambitions.

The Declaration of Independence is not the foundation of our countries laws. The Constitution is. And, nowhere in the Constitution is there even a hint of a purpose to insure or impose equality of men or things. The due process clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments renders liberty and property immune from attack except by the orderly processes fixed by law. This should ensure that the American government may not impose equality.

Despite this, again and again the legislature and the courts have told us that all men are equal and cite the Declaration of Independence as the final authority.

It is Liberty, freedom and independence, that gives man his opportunity to pursue happiness, to be rich or poor, or to be good or bad. Equality leaves men no choice.

It is Inequality that gives enlargement to religion, to intellect, to energy, to virtue, to love and to wealth. Equality of religion destroys all creeds. Equality of intellect stabilizes mediocrity. Equality of energy renders all men sluggards. Equality of virtue suspends all men outside the gates of Heaven. Equality of love stifles passion and destroys the family. Equality of wealth makes all men poor. Equality homogenizes so that cream does not rise to the top. It locks the eagle in a cage so that it may no longer soar.

Equality of freedom cannot exist without inequality in the rewards and earned fruits of that freedom. As James Mason said, there can be no equality of freedom, without leaving to all men a free and lawful choice of the "means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness".

More than 2000 years ago Aristotle said: "Equality may exist only among slaves." Slavery is the end result of levelling or equalizing . In the fruitless effort to achieve equality short of slavery the peaks must be bulldozed into the valleys to make a level plain. Such may be done only through the process now called "social engineering" which holds that the end justifies the means. The means to those ends always are force, restriction, compulsion, terror and a complete loss of Liberty.

Good Health?

“The American Health Care System is the best in the world”. I am sure you have heard that said. But, is it true?

Americans spend more per person for their health care than any other country in the world. In fact, nearly double. Yet our country does not rank in the top ten on any statistic measured by the World Health Organization ^[[1]]. How can that be called "good" health care?

The United States ranks 24^thin percentage of low birth-weight babies, 20^th in infant mortality, 17^th in maternal mortality, 17^th in rank of overall health and 11^th in life expectancy. . Approximately 85% of the money spent in the health industry goes to prolong ill life; while only 15% goes to prevention and cure.

So who is saying that our health system is so wonderful? As one might expect, it is the very people and institutions who stand to gain from it -- medical doctors, hospitals, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and lawyers. These could lose power and wealth if the public ever discovered the real truth – that they are not providing good health care and charging too much for it.

Of course, we must also point a finger at ourselves. "We the People" have been living our lives and doing our jobs as if good health can be obtained merely by taking a pill or having a surgical procedure. Just get rid of the symptoms. That is what most consumers demand and that is also all that most care givers are able to offer. Take these medications - for the rest of your life. 

What does it mean to be Healthy?

The word“Health” comes from ancient roots in words that mean “whole” and “holy”. It does not mean the absence of symptoms. Instead of focusing on symptoms and avoiding outright death, we would be wiser to define health as “wholeness” – physical, psychological, spiritual, intellectual, ecological, economic, and social well-being.

Some people realize this and are taking different (more wholesome) approaches. They know that good health involves avoiding illness in the first place. They want to be cured and return to normal life. Can a scalpel prevent a heart attack? Can it soothe our wounds, rebuild damaged tissue or calm a troubled mind? Can drugs help us adapt to our surroundings, clean up our environment, or enlighten our spirits? Probably not!

Consider the ten most common causes of death: heart disease, cancer, cerebrovascular disease, Pulmonary (Lung) Disease, Accidents, Pneumonia & Influenza, Diabetes, HIV, Suicide, and Liver Disease ^[[2]].  For each of these there are many preventative things that can be done to avoid becoming ill. Instead, modern medicine waits until after the symptoms appear and then try to apply quick fixes.

For more than 3,000 years, the Chinese system of medicine ^[[3]] has been keeping people healthy and curing their illnesses. It is based on the belief that all living things (people, animals,plants, etc.) have an inborn drive towards self-repair, wholeness and unity. Health is treated as the condition where the energies within the body are kept in balance and that, under normal circumstances, the body will keep this balance within itself; naturally.

Traditional Chinese Medicine is fundamentally different from Western medicine. It is primarily focused on preventing disease and illness. It aims to cure and return the entire body to its normal wholeness and balance.

This should not diminish the value and importance of Western medicine for situations where it is needed, as in cases of crisis and emergency care. It just means that Western medicine cannot help us with most of our health problems.

Maybe we should think long and hard about how we are spending our healthcare dollars and spend far more for prevention

---

[1] World Health Organization, “World Health Report 1999”
[2] Source: www.cdc.gov
[3] Archeological evidence indicates that acupuncture and Qi Gong were practiced as early as the Xin Dynasty (2205-1766 B.C.)

A Drop in the Ratings

Just heard the news - Standard and Poors is warning that the bond rating for the USA may drop if Congress doesn't do some really serious budget cutting. Isn't that exactly what I've been saying? Sooner or later the US won't be able to borrow more money (regardless of what the debt ceiling might be).

Lenders won't lend to those who borrow too much!

Scare Tactics

What would happen if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling?

Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner said , "The consequences of that would be catastrophic to the United States."

Ric Mishkin, a former governor of the Federal Reserve, says, "And if you default on the debt, which has never happened in our history, we have a whole different world. If you can't trust U.S. Treasury securities, what can you trust?" He goes on to sat, "This is what they do in countries like Argentina. This is not what we do in this country."

The debt ceiling now stands at about $14.3 trillion. At the current rate of borrowing, the limit will be reached around May 16. So what is likely to happen then?

Geithner says that interest rates would soar and the stock market would plummet. "Then we have to stop paying benefits to veterans, recipients of Social Security, Medicare," Geithner said.

While statements such as these may or may not be true, none of them have anything to do with possible default on the debt. Maybe they are just scare tactics to divert public opinion so that Washington can continue doing "business as usual".

Are statements such as these actually scare tactics?

Default occurs when there is a failure to pay principle and interest on a debt. The debt ceiling absolutely does not bar either. As for interest, even in today’s stressed environment, government revenue are significantly more than enough to cover interest charges. For example, average cash receipts for the past year averaged about $218 billion per month while, over the same period, interest on the debt was only about $16 billion per month (a little more that 7% of revenue).

Clearly there is enough revenue with which to pay interest on the debt. Therefore, a default on the debt would seem to be highly unlikely.

But, that doesn't mean there is no problem. During the same period of time mentioned above, the government spent an aaverage of about $333 billion per month on other spending. That amount is clearly far in excess of the available income. The government has been borrowing money to cover what was spent. For many decades the government has been spending beyond its income and borrowing to make up the difference. The result has been an exponential growth in the amount of the national debt.

Politics is the main reason why Congress has not limited its spending. The debt ceiling was enacted precisely to curb excessive government borrowing. It was intended to be non-political and impose a barrier within which Congress could make wise decisions and limit their spending relative to available income.

However, Congress has essentially ignored the debt ceiling and gone ahead with "politics as usual" regarding their spending. Every time that the debt ceiling has been reached, Congress has voted to raise it again. The effect is as if there were no ceiling at all. The exponential growth of the debt continues in an unsustainable manner.

Each time they raise the debt ceiling, Congress hopes to avoid taking "political heat" for making the difficult choices to live within our means. Each time they increase the debt, Congress abrogates its responsibility and further indentures our nation to those who hold our debt. Sooner or later the lenders will say, "You can borrow no more" and they will dictate the terms.

In my opinion, it would border upon an act of treason for Congress to increase our debt any further.

The Debt Ceiling must not be raised!

The Energy Equation

Recently I have been thinking about replacing my car; a 2003 Chevy Geo Tracker 4x4. I would like to get something that has better mileage. Seems like the manufacturer's main approach for getting better mileage is to make their cars smaller and lighter. Yet, the power plant is essentially the same as it was 75 years ago. Sorry -- making cars smaller, changing to fuel injectors, and adding computerized controls does not equal fundamental change.

I don't like "small" cars. At the end of the day they make me feel like a pretzel. When my butt is below my knees, I have trouble climbing up to get out.  Smaller, is just not better - for me.

Electric cars may be the new technology. I have some interest in the hybrid and all-electric alternatives even if they may be yet unproven. I do have strong reservations about whether or not they might really solve energy and pollution problems. I don't think we have all the facts and figures to prove them to be a better.

One thing I would like to see is the "Energy Equation". Does an electric car really save energy and pollute less than one that uses gasoline or diesel? I don't have enough information to tell.

What I need is an end-to-end assessment of the energy and pollution involved. You can't just jump into your electric car and start driving. The electric energy has to come from somewhere. A lot has to happen leading up to the recharge. You have to make the electricity and transmit it to where you can plug in. What is the total cost (in Joules of energy and tons of pollutants)? How much does it take to find the coal, dig the coal, burn the coal to make electricity, and transmit it across the power grid before finally consuming it to drive perhaps 500 miles. Compare that with similar costs for prospecting for oil, pumping it, refining it, transporting it and finally driving the same 500 miles.

Have we merely moved the pollution from the tailpipe to the generator or refinery? What about the ecological costs of mining? And, how about the handling and safe disposal  of extremely poisonous substances like Lithium for making the batteries?

I suspect that there are strong political and business interests behind all theses things. And, likie usual, the most interesting stuff is not on the surface where it can be easily seen.

Someone, please show me the figures?

Compare

America vs. Rome

America began as a society led by aristocrats. Powerful and influential people lead the people to revolt against British tyranny. Much like the founders of the ancient Roman Republic, the founders of our country tried to create a government that was fair. They paid an enormous amount of attention to givng power to the people, to stopping tyranny, and almost none to making themselves powerful. In fact most of them served their country without pay. They were, without a doubt, great and honorable men and human beings.

As time passed, our founders died and, much like Rome, less able men took their place. As the country prospered, other interests found ways to chip away at the structure. Just like Rome, the practice of allowing outlying regions to govern their own affairs lead to outlying corruption. In its early days our nation had to struggle with corruption on a state level. Tammany Hall was a symbol of everything wrong with government. Much like Rome, America swelled and grew fat on the conquest and expansion. We now hold held islands in the Atlantic and Pacific, our armies are flung all over the world (like the Roman Legions), and we interfere with almost every nation on earth.

Like Rome, our government has become more corrupt, more attuned to listening to big business than to the small everyday citizen. Like Rome, the very offiicials elected to protect us from corruption are often found themselves to be corrupted. Like Rome, we are engaged in a seemingly unending series of small wars that serve mostly to antagonize those around us and drain our wealth and treasure. Yet the military industrial complex (remember Eisenhower's warnings) fatten their pockets at the expense of We the People. Often the Roman arms manufacturers had more influence in their Senate than entire segments of the Roman population.

Like Rome, the government defines new roles for itself on a regular basis. This despite the limits specifically outlined in the Constitution; i.e. all rights not enumerated therein should be reserved to the States and to the people. Like Rome, our government panders to the mob, saying what they want them to hear and believe much like Orwell's Ministry of Truth. It doesn't matter whether its a mob in ancient Rome demanding free bread, taxes on big landowners, and to fling the Germans out, or if it's a mob in America asking for more welfare, taxes on the wealthy, and deporting illegal aliens. Like Rome, America has become paralyzed and unable to fix anything.

There were those in ancient Rome (like the Grachii brother) who advocated more participation in the Senate by the people, more protections for the people's rights to own land and property, less restrictions on the people's travel, the right for redress against patricians, land reform, and smallermore responsive government. Being more hardcore than America, Rome simply murdered their opponents in particularly gruesome fashion. A series of strongmen ran the country running over the rights of the citizens, engaging in wars, and running up debts.

Then Rome collapsed. The Republic was replaced by an Empire led by tyrants. It all started so slowly that noone really noticed. By the time it was done, it was too late. Everyone had already become complicit in it.

Is America showing parallels to Rome, in the last days of it's Republic?

Honor

What is it to be honorable?

Honor is a central concept to warriors throughout history. Wariors aren't honorable because they fear a wrathful God. They are honorable because it's a practical requirement of their profession. Being honorable is a powerful way to live. To live without honor is to be cowardly.

When hundreds or thousands of lives are at stake, honor is essential. Superiors must know that their subordinates are absolutely reliable. They m,ust trust them and have their unfailing loyalty. They must know that their warriors will march into battle upon command and die if necessary to defend their comrades, their society and their ideals.

Non-warriors must also rely upon the honor of warriors because they can be the most dangerous people in the world. They are the fittest and best trained people, and they weild the most awesome of weapons. Warriors without honor can quickly become tyrants.

Whether one is a warrior or not, personal honor is just as important. Without the moral compass that honor provides, personal actions can have harmful side effects upon those around you. Honor is not just a matter of being truthful, having self-restraint, loyalty, and other virtues. The kind of honor that warriors have is based on Obligation, Justice, and Courage.

By Obligation is meant the principle of meeting one's obligations as a member of human society. For example, in Japanese society when someone helps you, provides a service, or does a favor, you acquire an obligation or burdon to repay  the action in a manner commensurate with what they did for you. Obligation to society is the glue that binds honorable men together. But, obligation without Justice is hollow and meaningless.

Justice lies at the heart of honor. Fulfilling an obligation is not honorable if by fulfilling it an injustice is done. Justice is simply a matter of knowing what is right or wrong, and then doing what is right. In each situation, we need to weight the alternatives on the scale of honor and choose the course that is most right. Above all, we should avoid becoming obligated to dishonorable people.

Courage is the virtue most associated with being a warrior. Moral courage is the fortitude it takes to do what is right, no matter what the personal cost. Part of having moral courage is to openly admit when mistakes have been made. Courage doesn't mean that one doesn't feel fear. fear is a natural human emotion. One that helps you focus on the real threats. Your level of courage is determined by how you handle fear. Warriors face it, get control of themselves and do what needs to be done; cowards run.

Recommended reading: "Living The Martial Way" by Forrest E. Morgan, Maj. USAF

Track is Not a Spectator Sport

Just got back from an afternoon watching my Grand-daughter Maddie in her track meet. She ran the 100m (finished 2nd), 400m, and 1600m. Bu,t this is not a spectator sport. It takes almost an hour (of doing nothing) between events. At least it isn't as bad as a cross country meet where's there is nothing to watch a few moments when they leave the start and then you for ten minutes or more until they cross the finish line. Inbetween, they're running somewhere out of your view.

I really do prefer watching soccer or basketball.

Much Ado About Nothing

Last night the Congress finally agreed upon a budget cut of about $38 billion. This was after nearly bring government services to the brink of closure. So, what have they accomplished for all their bitter rhetoric and political posturing? A measly budget cut that amounts to only a fraction of the annual deficit. This is onloy a small drop in a very large bucket. When will our representatives begin to address the real problem - a massive and growing national DEBT?

Consider how insignificant a cut of $38 billion really is when compared with a deficit that adds about $1,300 billion to the debt each year? The cut amounts to a mere 2.9% while the debt continues to increase by an average of more than 9% over the past 35 years. Our nations entire Gross National Product (GDP) has only grown by an average of less that 4%. The national debt curently amounts to about 97% of GDP. That means that the national debt is increasing more than twice as fast as our countries ability to produce.

"We the People" have allowed our representative in washington to dazzle us with smoke and mirrors, pump themselves up with political rhetoric, act against the public interest, and borrow money to spend as if therer were no tomorrow. The system has run amok. Does anyone in Washington get the picture? For God's sake, the United States is on the brink of bankruptcy. Does anyone inWashington have the courage to stand up and say, "For the sake of our children and future generations, the madness must stop."?

Humility

Last Thursday, I had the distinct honor and privilege to have dinner with and hear a presentation by Col. Jack H. Jacobs a recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor. I was impressed by his humility and the attitude that he just did what he had to do and the medal did not honor him but, instead, all those who have served and paid the price without receiving any acknowledgement. He said that such a view was held by most, if not all, the MOH recipients.

Jack went on to talk about how important Freedom is and how little our current generation appreciates what it means. I couldn't agree more. It seems like the common view of most Americans is that anything wrong with their life will be fixed by someone other than themselves. How sad that is! Don't they realize that this country became great because our ancestors woked hard to improve their lives and didn't look for anyone else to do it for them.

Jack also pointed out that when the voters in Iraq (and other countries) are able to vote, they turn out more than 95% to the polls. Compare that with our country where we are lucky if 30% of those who have the right actually vote. In my opinion, not to vote when you have the chance is to give away our Freedom without a fight. And, by the way, if you do not vote you not only throw away your freedom, you throw mine along with it!