On this day in 1945, Indonesia declared independence from the Netherlands. I don't know if any of you stop and think about how much the world changed in the 20th Century, but it really is amazing. Let's just focus on our topic today though: colonization. For half of that century, colonization was alive and well. Vast expanses of land were ostensibly owned and run by many different foreign countries. Just off the top of my head, France in northern Africa, the United States in the Pacific, and England just about everywhere. What different ways of thinking must have these people had to think it was ok to to subjugate a people and steal their wealth.
This wasn't so long ago. When I think colonies, I generally think the 1700's, the American colonies, the race for land in the Americas. But even in our great-grandparents' time, in the 1940's, England held India as a colony. In Africa, these were often violent, oppressive regimes. These regimes shaped the futures of countless people. And generally, not for the good.
Anyway, let's open this up. What do you think was the biggest factor in the 20th Century? Technology? Cold War? Colonization? War? Ace of Base?
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
August 16
I read an article today about the Starbucks CEO calling on other businesses to stop contributing to political campaigns and to start creating jobs. Makes me think that either he, or Warren Buffett, is planning on running for office. What is with these displays of public awareness and altruism that are suddenly in the news? I like the ideal as much as the next guy, but is this anything more than publicity?
First off, when I think Starbucks, I don't think of a company that particularly cares about helping people. $4 cups of coffee and dry muffins. Secondly, why is it that my first instinct with Starbucks is, "put up or shut up" when my first instinct was just the opposite with Buffett?
I guess when it comes down to it, Buffett's stance makes perfect sense. If this country collapses, his money is gone too. Raising taxes, even on himself, is more of an investment in the long term. Starbucks' stance however simply strikes me as a stunt. They spend less on politics, they have less clout. They hire more workers, they spend more money. Where is the benefit, besides the publicity?
What do you guys think? Am I being too cynical here? Will other companies heed the call to spend more on employment and less on political campaigns? Are you more or less likely to drink Starbucks after learning about this? What is your favorite Starbucks drink? Do you even like coffee? What's wrong with you that you don't like coffee?
First off, when I think Starbucks, I don't think of a company that particularly cares about helping people. $4 cups of coffee and dry muffins. Secondly, why is it that my first instinct with Starbucks is, "put up or shut up" when my first instinct was just the opposite with Buffett?
I guess when it comes down to it, Buffett's stance makes perfect sense. If this country collapses, his money is gone too. Raising taxes, even on himself, is more of an investment in the long term. Starbucks' stance however simply strikes me as a stunt. They spend less on politics, they have less clout. They hire more workers, they spend more money. Where is the benefit, besides the publicity?
What do you guys think? Am I being too cynical here? Will other companies heed the call to spend more on employment and less on political campaigns? Are you more or less likely to drink Starbucks after learning about this? What is your favorite Starbucks drink? Do you even like coffee? What's wrong with you that you don't like coffee?
Monday, August 15, 2011
August 15
Today, noted businessman Warren Buffett declared that the government should raise taxes on the wealthy. Some responded, Michelle Bachmann for example, with a call to put up or shut up. I find this rather odd. What good can a single billionaire do to our deficit and economy in general. Buffett's net worth is around 50 billion. Pretty similar to Bill Gates. When our deficit is in the trillions, what can he do alone that will help?
It seems odd to attack someone saying that he is not paying his fair share for this country. No one donates to the United States. Really, why would they? America sells bonds that, while low in return, are far better than simply giving away money.
Perhaps Buffett isn't espousing this view for the good of the country or any degree of altruism. So what? He recognises that the country is spiraling out of control in debt. At the very worst, he knows that his fortune is gone if the dollar becomes worthless. An organized effort to raise taxes on the super rich might be the only thing that prevents total collapse in the future.
The danger that some people see is that these people are the job creators. Raising taxes might push them elsewhere. But the problem is that companies are sitting on record profits and not hiring. The economic times cause them to clamp down their bank accounts. It perpetuates the problem.
The debt ceiling debacle highlighted some very real problems in this country. We are borrowing too much. Very difficult cuts need to be made in spending to go hand in hand with tax increases. Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world, realizes that in order to stabilize the country, taxes need to rise because the pattern of lowering taxes to increase employment is not working.
What do you think? How would you balance this budget?
It seems odd to attack someone saying that he is not paying his fair share for this country. No one donates to the United States. Really, why would they? America sells bonds that, while low in return, are far better than simply giving away money.
Perhaps Buffett isn't espousing this view for the good of the country or any degree of altruism. So what? He recognises that the country is spiraling out of control in debt. At the very worst, he knows that his fortune is gone if the dollar becomes worthless. An organized effort to raise taxes on the super rich might be the only thing that prevents total collapse in the future.
The danger that some people see is that these people are the job creators. Raising taxes might push them elsewhere. But the problem is that companies are sitting on record profits and not hiring. The economic times cause them to clamp down their bank accounts. It perpetuates the problem.
The debt ceiling debacle highlighted some very real problems in this country. We are borrowing too much. Very difficult cuts need to be made in spending to go hand in hand with tax increases. Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world, realizes that in order to stabilize the country, taxes need to rise because the pattern of lowering taxes to increase employment is not working.
What do you think? How would you balance this budget?
Sunday, August 14, 2011
August 14
I don't usually talk about politics. Generally just starts fights. I live in a very republican state. I don't identify very well with either party. Therefore, I often simply don't vote. I did in the last presidential election, only because my sister worked on the Obama campaign and I wanted to tell her out I voted for McCain. She almost had an aneurysm, and it was completely worth it. It didn't really matter whom I voted for, my state's electoral votes were going republican, but I didn't let that fact get in the way of anything.
Why not vote? The hope and change rhetoric rubbed me all the wrong ways and I don't know how I would feel about McCain taking orders from Palin. Neither one seems superior to the other. Who is to say how McCain and Palin would have handled this current economic climate, but its not like we are sitting pretty right now.
For those of you living under a rock, the Iowa straw poll was conducted recently. Michelle Bachmann won by a thin margin. Ron Paul second and some guy, who even now I can't remember, dropped out because he was in third. I refuse to look up his name. I wonder how much money he spent to simply bow out. What a character. He is who I would like to be president. It is one thing to run for president and lose. It is quite another to run and then quit at the first sign of trouble. I wonder if he thinks he can try again sometime. Opponent campaign ads basically write themselves.
So that leaves us with Bachmann (Palin-class scary), Ron Paul (a class all his own) and Mitt Romney (I'm not sure what to say about him). Yeah, there are others, they mean nothing at this point.
Time for a gimmick Republicans. You tried Palin, Mitt lost last time, I think its time you go for broke. I want to see Rob Paul make it. Do I think he can win? Likely not. But we would be in for a wild ride.
Also, I didn't spell check any of the names. So there.
Why not vote? The hope and change rhetoric rubbed me all the wrong ways and I don't know how I would feel about McCain taking orders from Palin. Neither one seems superior to the other. Who is to say how McCain and Palin would have handled this current economic climate, but its not like we are sitting pretty right now.
For those of you living under a rock, the Iowa straw poll was conducted recently. Michelle Bachmann won by a thin margin. Ron Paul second and some guy, who even now I can't remember, dropped out because he was in third. I refuse to look up his name. I wonder how much money he spent to simply bow out. What a character. He is who I would like to be president. It is one thing to run for president and lose. It is quite another to run and then quit at the first sign of trouble. I wonder if he thinks he can try again sometime. Opponent campaign ads basically write themselves.
So that leaves us with Bachmann (Palin-class scary), Ron Paul (a class all his own) and Mitt Romney (I'm not sure what to say about him). Yeah, there are others, they mean nothing at this point.
Time for a gimmick Republicans. You tried Palin, Mitt lost last time, I think its time you go for broke. I want to see Rob Paul make it. Do I think he can win? Likely not. But we would be in for a wild ride.
Also, I didn't spell check any of the names. So there.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
August 13
On this date in 1521, the Aztec Empire finally collapsed. The fall of Tenochtitlán to the Spanish Conquistadors ended an empire and began the Spanish rise to power. The end of the Spanish Empire was told in the previous post.
Instead of discussing the battles and the eventual fall of the Aztec, much of which is common knowledge, let us discuss the rise of this Empire. It is not as well known that the Aztecs came from very humble beginnings. They arrived in the Valley of Mexico somewhere around the 12th century. Up until that point, they were poor, nomadic and generally dominated by neighboring tribes. It was not until the founding of Tenochtitlán that the Aztecs began to consolidate any power. Even this process was slow however. For the next two hundred years, they relied mainly on alliances and treachery to maintain their political autonomy. It was not until the 15th and 16th centuries that the Aztecs began to assert their will through military force.
The Aztecs were a force to be reckoned with in the Mexican peninsula, but only for a relatively short amount of time. They came from humble beginnings, but rose quickly. Far more quickly than they rose, however, they were extinguished. The hundreds of years of clawing their way to a position of power were undone in just a couple years. The Aztecs were unable to leave a legacy on the world. Their grand city, Tenochtitlán, which boasted a population some two or three times as large as London, was raised and the people subjugated.
Instead of discussing the battles and the eventual fall of the Aztec, much of which is common knowledge, let us discuss the rise of this Empire. It is not as well known that the Aztecs came from very humble beginnings. They arrived in the Valley of Mexico somewhere around the 12th century. Up until that point, they were poor, nomadic and generally dominated by neighboring tribes. It was not until the founding of Tenochtitlán that the Aztecs began to consolidate any power. Even this process was slow however. For the next two hundred years, they relied mainly on alliances and treachery to maintain their political autonomy. It was not until the 15th and 16th centuries that the Aztecs began to assert their will through military force.
The Aztecs were a force to be reckoned with in the Mexican peninsula, but only for a relatively short amount of time. They came from humble beginnings, but rose quickly. Far more quickly than they rose, however, they were extinguished. The hundreds of years of clawing their way to a position of power were undone in just a couple years. The Aztecs were unable to leave a legacy on the world. Their grand city, Tenochtitlán, which boasted a population some two or three times as large as London, was raised and the people subjugated.
Friday, August 12, 2011
August 12
On this date in 1898, a peace treaty, called the Treaty of Paris, was signed between the United States and the Spanish formally ending the hostilities known as the Spanish-American war. The origins of this war are dubious at best. Tensions had been building between the belligerents due to reports of Spanish atrocities in Cuba and elsewhere, and finally exploded with the sinking of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor. While no real evidence existed that implicated the Spanish in this alleged attack, popular option made compromise impossible. The United States demanded that Spain abandon Cuba; a demand that was summarily rebuffed. Madrid declared war, as did the United States.
What followed was a 10 week conflict that can hardly be called much of a war. It was one sided on all fronts, in favor of the United States. Superior numbers in most battles aided the United States. In the end, Spain was ejected from many islands, including Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippians.
While the main issue was ostensibly Cuban freedom, it is difficult to accept this as the actual cause. The results of the war are too in line with the Monroe Doctrine and the expansionist policies of the United States at the time. Unconfirmed reports, coupled with an unconfirmed attack to create a situation where the predatory nature of the United States at that time could be sated. Much like the Mexican-American War 50 years before, the United States saw this as an opportunity to expand their holdings against an ailing foe.
What followed was a 10 week conflict that can hardly be called much of a war. It was one sided on all fronts, in favor of the United States. Superior numbers in most battles aided the United States. In the end, Spain was ejected from many islands, including Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippians.
While the main issue was ostensibly Cuban freedom, it is difficult to accept this as the actual cause. The results of the war are too in line with the Monroe Doctrine and the expansionist policies of the United States at the time. Unconfirmed reports, coupled with an unconfirmed attack to create a situation where the predatory nature of the United States at that time could be sated. Much like the Mexican-American War 50 years before, the United States saw this as an opportunity to expand their holdings against an ailing foe.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
August 11
On this day in 1909, the liner Arapahoe, became the first ship to ever use the distress call S.O.S. These letters, expressed in Morse Code, are three dots, three dashes and three dots. The phrase was created during the International Radiotelegraphic Convention held in Berlin in 1906. Contrary to popular belief, these letters do not express any particular words, but were simply determined to be easy to remember and transmit.
In the case of the Arapahoe, the ship had broken a propeller and was disabled while traveling north from Jacksonville, Florida. Despite bad weather, the Captain of the Arapahoe gambled that the sister ship, Apache, should be in the vacinity. He attempted to call the Apache wirelessly using the S.O.S. distress call. The gamble paid off and the Arapahoe was rescued and taken to port.
In the United States, the distress call S.O.S. has fallen out of use. While the meaning of the phrase is common knowledge, the Coast Guard no longer monitors Morse code transmissions. Generally, satellite relays are used to transmit a distress call. Another method is using radiotelephony to transmit MAY DAY. So keep this in mind next time your ship is sinking!
In the case of the Arapahoe, the ship had broken a propeller and was disabled while traveling north from Jacksonville, Florida. Despite bad weather, the Captain of the Arapahoe gambled that the sister ship, Apache, should be in the vacinity. He attempted to call the Apache wirelessly using the S.O.S. distress call. The gamble paid off and the Arapahoe was rescued and taken to port.
In the United States, the distress call S.O.S. has fallen out of use. While the meaning of the phrase is common knowledge, the Coast Guard no longer monitors Morse code transmissions. Generally, satellite relays are used to transmit a distress call. Another method is using radiotelephony to transmit MAY DAY. So keep this in mind next time your ship is sinking!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)