Obama Administration Lobbies Against NYC School Boss Candidate

Joshua Starr
(Image: montgomeryschoolsmd.org)

According to a report in today's Washington Post, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan actively spoke against a candidate being considered for New York City's education chancellor. Duncan's target was Joshua Starr, currently serving as school superintendent in the affluent DC suburbs of Montgomery County, Maryland.

Starr's offense was to dare criticize aspects of the Obama-Duncan education agenda, notably the use of standardized tests to evaluate an instructor's "value." He also called for a three-year break from high-stakes standardized exams. This moratorium strikes at the heart of the data-driven agenda Duncan and Obama have believed essential to so-called "education reform."

As the Post story noted, a Cabinet-level official very rarely intervenes in a local school district matter. However, a characteristic of the Obama and Duncan regimes is their thin skins when facing criticism. Their arrogant belief is that they are the smartest people in the room. As a consequence, they typically ignore contrary opinions and simply do what they want. (Obama's inability to touch voters' hearts is connected to this behavioral outlook.) Duncan's presumed torpedo sank Starr's chances, even though New York City mayor DiBlasio shares some of Starr's profound reservations about the education "reformers'" questionable assertions.

As Anthony Hopkins, playing Richard Nixon in the eponymous film, said: "Presidents don't threaten. They don't have to."

France Contemplates Smartphone Tax to Subsidize Gallic Culture

Image: tech2.in.com

European nations have historically subsidized their arts institutions. In the modern era, those funds typically come from tax revenues. That scenario includes the French film industry, currently under siege from America's stunningly successful export of Hollywood entertainment. The French government believes its homegrown cultural talent needs additional sources of revenue to maintain its artistic independence, Gallic identity, and, presumably, highbrow quality.

To that end, the Hollande administration is considering placing a one-percent tax on smartphones and other electronic gadgets "capable of accessing movies, music, and other content," according to a story in Bloomberg BusinessWeek. Tech companies such as Google have opposed the proposed tax scheme. One suspects that warming up in high tech's legal/PR bullpen is the argument frequently appearing in the United States: taxation would "stifle innovation." Of course, high tech's thin, unsubstantiated perspective pivots on the notion that the forces creating the alleged innovation should not be interrupted from doing God's work.

What goes unstated is that France's suggested one-percent skimming of gadget transaction prices means high tech firms won't see that money. Hey, doesn't Paris understand that God's work is expensive?

Wall Street's Entry Into Residential Rental Market "Might Not End Well"

When the Great Recession struck the nation with full fury, the residential housing market suffered some serious blows. The most significant damage was done in the low-end residential segment, where strung out owners found themselves staring at foreclosure. At the time, the reigning thought was that foreclosures would depress housing prices. That event did not happen, with certain exceptions. What stemmed the foreclosure tsunami was Wall Street intervention. No, this was not done for the benefit of the Republic. Rather, sharp-eyed financiers saw an opportunity to buy low and, presumably, sell high at some point down the road. In the meantime, Wall Street firms such as Blackstone became landlords. The irony, as Prashant Gopal points out in a thoughtful Bloomberg opinion piece, is that the foreclosed owners have often become rent paying tenants.

Image: daytondailynews.com

The deal for Wall Street is a sweet one, as firms such as Blackstone have access to Federal Reserve funds at a rate roughly half of what mere mortals pay for a routine home mortgage. The chutzpah does not end there. Another Bloomberg article notes how Magnetar Capital, an Illinois-based alternative asset manager that's a new player in the foreclosed residential rental world, demanded a tax rollback on the foreclosed properties it recently purchased in Huber Heights, Ohio. Magnetar real estate representatives promised the money would be used to spruce up the acquired properties. Of course, unstated was that the "improvements" would benefit Magnetar rather than Huber Heights' neediest citizens.

Placing much faith in the promises of indifferent, Olympian financial firms does not seem a way for a community to survive, never mind thrive. Should one trust Magnetar's promises? The Bloomberg report on Dayton noted that

In 2006 and 2007, Magnetar helped banks create complex securities backed by risky mortgages. At the same time, the hedge fund [Magnetar] made bets that would profit if the homeowners defaulted. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigated the deals after housing imploded and has fined some of the banks involved. The government hasn't filed a complaint against Magnetar.

The notion that one should trust the lofty sentiments of a hedge fund that created dodgy mortgage-backed securities and bet against them seems downright stupid. The reality is that the Huber Heights tenants' financial assets are essentially being strip mined. Meanwhile, this dark scenario is being played out against a steady drumbeat of  economic "recovery" assertions from East Coast major media players, DC politicians, and Wall Street spokespeople. A glance at Huber Heights' new tenant class strongly argues otherwise.

American Sailors Involved in Fukushima Cleanup May Have Cancer

Fish caught near Fukushima
post-tsunami
(Photo: LA Times)

Remember Fukushima? The nuclear meltdown had a number of disastrous consequences for the Japanese population and the area near the disaster. According to a lawsuit recently filed in San Diego, the radiation may have impacted American midshipmen and sailors involved in humanitarian efforts in the Fukushima area. The financial blog zerohedge.com cobbled together a number of stories related to the litigation.

It's useful to remember that, prior to the Fukushima incident, the nuclear power industry had become something of a darling among "alternative energy" advocates. That perspective suddenly changed after the Japanese nuclear disaster. One doesn't read optimistic pieces about nuclear energy's "potential". However, many nuke plants remain quite active throughout the world, notably in France. Each operating facility is essentially playing poker with random events and unperceived engineering miscalculations. That's not a game, and certainly not a bet, I want to play.

A Look Ahead to 2014's Surveillance Politics

Tech's high priests and their financial enablers continue to squirm under the harsh light the Snowden surveillance revelations cast on their activities. Naturally, Silicon Valley, which has viewed the developed world as its experimental animal, has decided to publicly stand tall against the alleged bad actors at the NSA.

A few caveats should make one pause in that convenient posture. Peter Thiel, Pay Pal principal and leading libertarian light in the Valley, happens to be a major investor in a firm called Palantir. This company was characterized in a recent Financial Times piece as "a secretive data-mining company that made its name working for the CIA..." Jeff Bezos' Amazon, which has been quiet in the entire NSA-Valley imbroglio, has a cloud computing contract with the Central Intelligence Agency. As for other tech firms, do you want to guess how many have federal contracts?

Peter Thiel

Meanwhile, the usual hypocritical "rule of law" arguments high tech trots out to defend its global interests and ruthless invasion of personal privacy have notably not emerged to protest the NSA's own data "extraction" efforts. After all, the NSA is a federal agency with broad mandates to protect and serve the nation. And that's the law, too.

A recent article in Wired suggests that diminished expectations for "business development" is a significant reason the Valley was shocked to discover gambling in its data collection and exploitation casino. Chris Finan's opinion piece -- "What To Expect From Surveillance Politics in 2014 (Hint: It's Not Reform)" -- asserts high tech's public outrage partly stems from anticipated international business losses as a consequence of the Snowden expose. Finan contends

it’s safe to say that American tech executives are angry. And they have good reason to be: U.S. companies’ association — via cooperation, coercion, or simply unwitting victimization — with government surveillance programs have cost them huge shares of the IT services market internationally.Forrester Research has projected that the overall impact to the U.S. cloud computing industry could be as high as $180 billion, or 25% of IT service provider revenues over three years. While many companies will try to convince policymakers of the the significant costs of intrusive surveillance and the need for reform — as a group of tech execs tried to do this week in a meeting with President Obama — expect companies to take matters into their own hands.

What's fascinating is the Valley's relentless determination to transform the world into a global data colony which these firms are free to exploit as they please. An essential piece of that initiative is the evisceration and degradation of personal privacy. Anyone who has received unwanted "targeted" advertising on their phones, tablets, or computers can grasp this concept. Why does the Valley insist it qualifies for an exemption from criticism over its arrogant, anti-privacy activities? The NSA, in this case, is a convenient pinata for actions high tech has developed, exploited, and tried to wink and nod its way through legal action and protest.

One wishes the Valley, in its collective sense, had a conscience that went beyond IPO "success" and an unwavering faith in "progress" (as defined by improved data mining and consumer gadgets). Those sentiments are rarely displayed. At least the NSA has a mission to guard our nation. The Valley's primary mission is to guard its own interests, its own egos, its own financial opportunities. Who do you trust, baby?

Library of Congress Adds 25 Films to National Film Registry

Librarian of Congress
James H. Billington
(Image: loc.gov)

The Library of Congress announced its 2013 additions to the National Film Registry (NFR). According to a Washington Post story on the NFR, the movie selections are made by a committee of one: the Librarian of Congress James H. Billington. His goal is to choose movies that somehow represent the American cultural zeitgeist, at least as depicted on celluloid or digital capture. To that end, the NFR is not a "best of" collection, as those critically anointed films don't always tell an insightful story about the culture that spawned them.

On the other hand, Billington chose some films that very few people have seen. Some are clearly generated by the art world and its chosen few. Some come from the silent era (any effort in that area deserves praise and respect). Some contemporary movies slip into the mix, although choices such as Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf strike me as an older generation's fascination.

For all its flaws, the NFR serves a useful purpose. Films are notorious for disappearing or surviving in some disfigured way. The latter issue is no joke. A stunning number of post-World War II movies are visually diminished, a consequence of film stock being a poor preservation medium. To save our nation's legacy, the NFR works hard to preserve the powerful, lyrical, or just plain silly films that reflect American myths and the reality underpinning them. The preservation of our heritage is one reason to pay federal taxes -- and smile.

Battle of the Brands: Robinson Cano vs NY Yankees

Robinson Cano in Seattle
(photo: sfgate.com)

The New York area's sports pages were recently roiled over the contract negotiations between the New York Yankees, its star second baseman Robinson Cano, his agent Jay-Z, and the Seattle Mariners. After considerable back-and-forth, Cano signed with Seattle for $240 million. This move led to consternation in New York, as if the Yankees, with an aging, suspect lineup, had stepped off a steep cliff.

From a talent perspective, Cano's move from Yankee pinstripes is unquestionably a loss for the team that calls The Bronx home. However, the negotiations were more than simply about the money. I think what soured the Yanks on Cano was Jay-Z's ploy to make his first MLB client a personal brand. The Yankees, in that scenario, were a splendid platform from which to launch the Robinson Cano product. The baseball team, with its own brand indissolubly linked to its successful, high-profile players, would not have been able to control the Cano brand. The notion that a player would be bigger than the team -- clearly Agent Jay-Z's talent management goal -- was something the Yankees could not tolerate. (Jay-Z's wife, Beyonce, recently demonstrated the clout of a personal brand with her no pre-publicity, iTunes exclusive release album. Yes, I think the Yankees watched that development quite closely.)

Jay-Z
(photo: npr.org)

The Yankees had experienced the emergence of personal branding in the early days of its contract with third baseman Alex Rodriguez. A-Rod had his eyes on branding from the start of his move from Texas to baseball's lucrative Northeast markets. The Yankees were not alone in that situation. Many fans forget that the New York Mets seriously entertained signing Rodriguez at the apogee of his on-field success. At the time, one demand from the Rodriguez camp was a personal marketing representative for A-Rod. In essence, he would develop and exploit his personal brand. This business scheme would have been under A-Rod's control, and quite separate from his team's success and marketing drives. The Mets could not or would not swallow this negotiating demand, and eventually took a pass on A-Rod's services.

Alex Rodriguez
(photo: Wikipedia)

While times have changed since Alex Rodriguez explored ways to create a personal brand, the lust for branded gold has accelerated. This year, common stock is now available in selected NFL players. You can purchase 100 shares of Houston running back Arian Foster, for example. Enterprises such as the Yankees have kept a close eye on these developments; my guess is that personal brands could significantly and irrevocably disrupt the teams' revenue and marketing plans. For star-driven teams such as the Yanks, the Los Angeles Lakers, and the Dallas Cowboys, personal brands are red flags. The Yankees just drew a line with Robinson Cano, so definitively that the team would willingly say adios to a tremendous, homegrown infielder at the prime of his career. The feeling was that "the Yanks didn't want to pay Cano." That's true, but misses the point. The Yankees are determined to maintain their brand. No player, not even Robinson Cano, could be permitted to be bigger than one of the world's great franchises, certainly not while on the Yankee roster. As for Jay-Z, the team sent a message: we don't need you and we don't want you. Tell your client to have a ball in baseball's version of marketing Siberia, far away from his natural Hispanic fan base, and even further from appearing in post-season play.

Hey, didn't Alex Rodriguez make his name in Seattle?

My Favorite Ten Fiction Books

Leonardo Sciascia

Someone I know recently posted on Facebook a list of her top ten books. Since nonfiction did not make her cut, I'm assuming she kept the list limited to works that required little or no fact checking. (I'm not counting litigation considerations in this case.)

Well, I'm going to post my ten here, while fully acknowledging I could easily add another ten, ten times over:

• Day of the Owl/Leonardo Sciascia
• Creation/Gore Vidal
• The High Window/Raymond Chandler
• Cotton Comes to Harlem/Chester Himes
• Libra/Don DeLillo
• The Idiot/Fyodor Dostoyevsky
• Tropic of Cancer/Henry Miller
• The Plague/Albert Camus
• Scoop/Evelyn Waugh
• Flight to Canada/Ishmael Reed

Report: Saatchi Tried to Game His Book's Best-Seller Status

Charles Saatchi and Nigella Lawson,
in presumably happier days
(photo: dailymail.co.uk)

Charles Saatchi casts a long shadow in the global advertising game and the big-time contemporary art world. Befitting one of such stature, he published a book and shared his thoughts with a global audience. Saatchi, who understands publishing's inside game, desired best-seller status. According to a report in today's Los Angeles Times, the British ad/art maestro was not leaving his book's sales fate entirely to the vagaries of public taste. The story, noting highly public and nasty Saatchi-Nigella Lawson divorce court proceedings, cited Saatchi aides allegedly being directed to purchase their employer's books. The notion was to game the best-seller list.

There's something naive in the belief that cash purchases of a number of books could generate sufficient sales to achieve best-seller levels. It's more likely that Saatchi wanted to create "buzz" that would create the impression of a fast sales start for his tome.

More dippy than Saatchi's concern about his book's performance is the notion that anyone would care about the work's "best-seller" halo. The idea that readers' choices need to be guided by the supposed popularity of a book denigrates the quality of its prose, the substance of its ideas, the delivery of its entertainment values. You don't need an egotistical ad man's chutzpah, manufactured online "reader comments," or sales popularity charts to help you draw your own conclusions about what book makes sense for you.

Is Bitcoin's Lure the Cure for Currency Uncertainty?

The recently invented currency known as Bitcoin has drawn more than just raised eyebrows. A growing number of enterprises and individuals are accepting Bitcoin for payment transactions. From what one can understand with some degree of reliability, Bitcoin fans tend to have a global business perspective. There's also, at least in the Anglo-Saxon nations, a strain of libertarian perspective animating the Bitcoin crowd. Governmental boundaries and regulation, which Bitcoin is specifically intended to avoid, offend both libertarians and globalists, adding to the currency's attractiveness.

Institutions such as large financial services firms and governmental entities are lukewarm to Bitcoin's flash. They worry about money laundering, whether the source is creepy oligarchs or sinister underworld elements. Another concern is Bitcoin's ability to dodge institutional insider skims such as currency value differentials. That fret is not trivial. A November 2013 Venture Beat story noted an automobile sale involving Bitcoin in Australia. In the article, the manufacturer's CEO, David Brim, pointedly noted the savings the Bitcoin transaction generated:

using Bitcoin reduces costs, since the company uses it to pay overseas suppliers without incurring currency trade and transaction costs. All purchases, however, still do include Australia's goods and services tax.

Brim also touted Bitcoin's promise of "disruption" to the current payment systems. If there were ever a word that is quickly pushed front and center to promote "progress" as an irresistible, inarguable good, "disruption" comes to the head of the line. That "disruption" might just suck rarely enters this sort of dialogue.

The calculation of Bitcoin value, and its secure housing, depends upon a trustworthy electronic network. Bitcoin advocates seem to take a smug view of the digital world and the arrogant assurances of tech's high priests. Anyone who has lost "content," such as book readers did in flaps involving Amazon's removal of George Orwell works, should harbor mistrust of such breezy sentiments. Those who have tasted credit card transaction "issues" have had up-close-and-personal experience with "Sorry, we can't complete your purchase, unless you have cash." I'm not suggesting the solution to Bitcoin's proposition is to stash money in a mattress or hoard gold. And it's fair, in light of the 2008 financial crash, to doubt the staying power and integrity of major financial firms. The question comes down to trust. If your answer is God, more power to you. However, as the late Jean Shepherd said, "In God we trust, all others pay cash" seems spot on. Whose cash? Now there's the conundrum.

Murdered Illinois Lottery Winner's Heirs Settle Estate Squabble

Urooj Khan
(photo: abcnews.go.com)

In May 2012, Urooj Khan won a million dollars in a scratch-off Illinois lottery game. However, his seeming good fortune became Khan's fatal destiny: the Chicago-area small businessman was poisoned shortly after he flashed a million dollar smile. The incident became much more curious when the Cook County coroner's initial ruling of death by heart attack was re-examined at the insistence of a brother of the deceased. The law's second crack at the corpse found cyanide.

The dead man's two heirs had a strong interest in the distribution of the lottery loot. Eventually, the case entered the courts. Today's Chicago Tribune reports that a settlement has been filed in which the heirs each obtain a portion of the deceased's estate. One of them, a daughter from a previous marriage, gets a third of the gambling proceeds and a handful of real estate properties the deceased owned. Heiress #2, the presumably bereaved widow, keeps her husband's dry cleaning business and what remains of the jackpot.

According to the Trib story, no one has been charged in Khan's murder. Maybe the perp is just plain lucky.

AP Report: NSA-Silicon Valley Struggle Centers on Profit That User Data Generates

The Snowden leaks revealed the global reach and evisceration of personal privacy the American military-tech complex routinely conducts. While Silicon Valley's highest profile search and social media firms have cried "foul" over the NSA's stunning data mining and analysis activities, these libertarian entrepreneurs are reticent to come clean about the depth and relentlessness of their collection of personal data. Of course, the money and power firms such as Google (yes, thanks for Blogger), Facebook, and Amazon now command should make one pause. However, few media outlets feel any urge to upset these data titans. (To this day, some major media outlets continue to identity data-driven Amazon's principal business as a retail concern, as if Jeff Bezos' ambition is simply to open an online version of The Home Depot.)

An Associated Press article appearing in today's siliconvalley.com attempts to illuminate certain truths animating the NSA-Silicon Valley struggle. AP reporters Michael Liedtke's and Marcy Gordon's useful piece gets to the heart of the matter: profit. The NSA's "violation of trust," according to the piece, has upset the Valley's expansion plans into emerging nations and their economies. Oops. Now nations such as Brazil are now at least publicly determined to keep close the data its citizens generate. Meanwhile, the Valley's lustful data expropriation and exploitation, along with its trumpeting of the virtues of "sharing," has produced a 21st Century version of colonialism that must certainly rub formerly colonized nations a very wrong way.

Facebook server farm in Sweden

The stakes are high for the Valley. As the AP story noted, countries in addition to Brazil "and international regulators are considering strict rules for data-handling by U.S. tech companies. If that were to happen, it could cripple the companies' crucial drive to grow in overseas markets, and could fracture the Internet's seamless inner-workings."

Yes, you're welcome to share or post this story.