I have certainly heard and read plenty about the sad state of US public schools, particularly in poorer areas. I have not personally experienced it, my suburban public school, back a long time ago, was good, and I came out of it ready for a Quaker prep school. But where there is smoke there is fire, and by all accounts there are too many miserable public schools.
Be that as it may, typical hiring managers are concerned with more than the job applicant's ability to spell and do arithmetic. They have other concerns such as: Is this kid a druggie? Will he do drugs on company property? Or worse, sell drugs to my other employees? Is this kid honest? When something goes wrong will he tell the truth or will he lie to me? Will he steal? Is he trustworthy enough to put on a cash register? Does he have an attitude that will cause trouble with my foremen or the other men on the floor? Will his dress scare off my customers? Does he want that job bad enough to work hard for it?
Dunno if US schools, even with the best of intentions, can prepare their students for the real working world. Seems like you need parents, community, family and friends to impart these basic qualities.
Saturday, June 27, 2015
Friday, June 26, 2015
Linux Rising
For the last week this blog has enjoyed more hits from Linux systems (57%) than Windows systems (21%). And vastly more hits from the Chrome browser than second place Firefox, and third place Internet Exploder.
Limitations on Free Speech, Funerals
I heard that Charleston and some other South Carolina town were passing municipal ordinances forbidding demonstrations at the up coming funerals for the victims at the AME church last week. Excellent idea. In civilized countries families can bury their dead in peace. Anyone at a funeral is a mourner and should conduct themselves accordingly. Otherwise they should not be there.
The Supremes don't seem to understand this. Some four years ago they held that the "Westboro Baptist Church" must be allowed to demonstrate at the funeral of a marine killed in Afghanistan, calling the demonstration free speech. There are some limits on free speech, and funerals are special sad occasions that should be free of disorderly ranting.
The Supremes don't seem to understand this. Some four years ago they held that the "Westboro Baptist Church" must be allowed to demonstrate at the funeral of a marine killed in Afghanistan, calling the demonstration free speech. There are some limits on free speech, and funerals are special sad occasions that should be free of disorderly ranting.
Thursday, June 25, 2015
The Supremes vote for Obamacare
The Supreme Court voted 6-3 to uphold Obamacare, not as written, but as interpreted by the Obama adminstration, i.e. it stays in place, as it has been, probably forever.
In one way, it's letting the work of Congress stand. If Congress could muster the votes, it could fix Obamacare in any one of a bunch of ways. Today's Supreme Court decision says that Congress must do the heavy lifting, the Court isn't gonna get into it for them. Congress is deadlocked on the issue, neither side has the votes to do what it wants to do.
We are probably doomed to live with Obama care for ever. Enough people get benefits from it, and it is so ideologically appealing to lefties, that I cannot visualize a future Congress changing it, much, if at all. Obamacare is a heavy drag on the economy. It makes employers reluctant to hire, because the health care costs are so steep. It is a cost enhancer, and one big reason that we are still stuck in Great Depression 2.0. We may remain stuck there forever.
In one way, it's letting the work of Congress stand. If Congress could muster the votes, it could fix Obamacare in any one of a bunch of ways. Today's Supreme Court decision says that Congress must do the heavy lifting, the Court isn't gonna get into it for them. Congress is deadlocked on the issue, neither side has the votes to do what it wants to do.
We are probably doomed to live with Obama care for ever. Enough people get benefits from it, and it is so ideologically appealing to lefties, that I cannot visualize a future Congress changing it, much, if at all. Obamacare is a heavy drag on the economy. It makes employers reluctant to hire, because the health care costs are so steep. It is a cost enhancer, and one big reason that we are still stuck in Great Depression 2.0. We may remain stuck there forever.
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
Very Good Announcement Speech, Bobby Jindal
Just finished listening to Bobby Jindal on Fox News. They carried his entire speech, live. Jindal is pretty good, at least as good as The Donald, the the business of a good old fashioned stem winding speech. He may be Indian American, but he gave a good old effective American political speech. He is a real governor, who did a lot of good work in a state that needed it after Hurricane Katrina. I wish him well. He could make a decent US president, better than the one we have.
Could the Germans have won?
We now think of allied victory in WWII, which set the pattern for the rest of the 20th century, as inevitable. America, Britain, and Soviet Russia had a vastly greater population, vastly great industrial capacity, and all the natural resources needed to fight a war. But, you need to look at the world as it was in 1940, Hitler's high tide. His armies had crushed Poland and then France, occupied Denmark, Holland, Norway, Belgium and Luxemburg, and driven the British into the sea at Dunkirk. Hitler owned most of Western Europe. Britain alone stood in opposition.
Starting from this high point, what could the Germans have done to win the war, and dominate the world, probably until today? To be real about, or even semi real, we have to have Hitler running Germany. Without Hitler, we would not have had WWII. In 1940 everyone in Europe remembered the horror that was WWI, only twenty years in the past. Nobody, except a madman, which Hitler was, could think that any diplomatic gain, territorial expansion, anything at all, was worth doing WWI over again. If Hitler is removed from the scene, say by assassination in the 1930's, the world would have been spared WWII. Under any other leader, the Germans would have thrown their weight around, and obtained concessions, but they would have not sent their army into Poland in 1939.
First of all, Hitler could have gone for the bomb. It was Otto Hahn, a German physicist working in Germany, who discovered nuclear fission in 1938. If the industrial resources the Germans poured into the fairly useless V2 rocket program been applied to creating nuclear weapons, Germany might well have been able to nuke London or Moscow by 1944.
Second, Hitler could have polished off the British in 1940. This would have destroyed one of the three great allied powers. It would have allowed Hitler to throw more force against the Russians in 1941 without the British sniping at him from the West. It would have deprived the allies of the airbase from which the RAF and USAAF bombed Germany flat by 1945. It would have captured the launch pad for Operation Overlord, which sealed the fate of Germany. Overlord's vast armada of shipping was largely short range shallow draft landing craft, seaworthy enough to cross the Channel in good weather, but incapable of crossing the Atlantic.
The British Army had abandoned all their tanks, artillery, motor vehicles and heavy equipment at Dunkirk. Only a few troops still had their rifles when evacuated to England. Had the Germans put three or four divisions ashore in England that summer, the place would have been theirs. The trick was to get those divisions across the channel in the face of the Royal Navy. Barges and landing craft full of troops are dead meat when the British steam up along side with a battleship. The German counter to the Royal Navy was the Luftwaffe. Air attack with bombs and torpedoes will sink anything that floats. The Luftwaffe needed to achieve air superiority, namely beat down the RAF to the point where the slow and vulnerable Stuka's could operate over the channel without being bounced by RAF Spitfires. The Luftwaffe nearly achieved air superiority during the 1940 air battles, doing it the hard way, flying into British airspace and dog fighting with RAF Spitfires and Hurricanes. If they had concentrated upon knocking out the coastal radar stations, the sector stations, the air fields, and the aircraft factories they might have done it. All the British accounts of the Battle of Britain stress how close the Germans came to winning it.
Thirdly, Hitler could have given Rommel and the Afrika Korps more support. Rommel only had a couple of German divisions, going up against the British with eight to twelve divisions. A couple more divisions for Rommel taken from the 140 sent into Russia would have made all the difference in the middle east but wouldn't have made much difference on the eastern front. If the paratroops sent to take Crete had been used to take Malta instead, Rommel's supply lines across the Mediterranean would have been secure. Had Rommel taken Egypt, the Suez Canal, and the Iraq oilfields it would have solved Hitler's fuel problems, and dealt a crushing blow to the British.
Fourth, Hitler could have refrained from declaring war on the United States after Pearl Harbor. He had made no binding treaties with the Japanese, he didn't owe them anything. As it was, he made Roosevelt's job in pursuing a "Germany First" strategy far easier. And he drove the last nails into the American isolationist's coffin. Without Hitler's gratuitous declaration of war, the isolationists might have kept America out of the European war for months and months. For Hitler, locked in a death struggle with the British and the Soviets at the time, a delay of months in American belligerency is not to be sneezed at.
There are others, but the first four above are enough for this post. And a world where the Third Reich won would have been very bad indeed.
Starting from this high point, what could the Germans have done to win the war, and dominate the world, probably until today? To be real about, or even semi real, we have to have Hitler running Germany. Without Hitler, we would not have had WWII. In 1940 everyone in Europe remembered the horror that was WWI, only twenty years in the past. Nobody, except a madman, which Hitler was, could think that any diplomatic gain, territorial expansion, anything at all, was worth doing WWI over again. If Hitler is removed from the scene, say by assassination in the 1930's, the world would have been spared WWII. Under any other leader, the Germans would have thrown their weight around, and obtained concessions, but they would have not sent their army into Poland in 1939.
First of all, Hitler could have gone for the bomb. It was Otto Hahn, a German physicist working in Germany, who discovered nuclear fission in 1938. If the industrial resources the Germans poured into the fairly useless V2 rocket program been applied to creating nuclear weapons, Germany might well have been able to nuke London or Moscow by 1944.
Second, Hitler could have polished off the British in 1940. This would have destroyed one of the three great allied powers. It would have allowed Hitler to throw more force against the Russians in 1941 without the British sniping at him from the West. It would have deprived the allies of the airbase from which the RAF and USAAF bombed Germany flat by 1945. It would have captured the launch pad for Operation Overlord, which sealed the fate of Germany. Overlord's vast armada of shipping was largely short range shallow draft landing craft, seaworthy enough to cross the Channel in good weather, but incapable of crossing the Atlantic.
The British Army had abandoned all their tanks, artillery, motor vehicles and heavy equipment at Dunkirk. Only a few troops still had their rifles when evacuated to England. Had the Germans put three or four divisions ashore in England that summer, the place would have been theirs. The trick was to get those divisions across the channel in the face of the Royal Navy. Barges and landing craft full of troops are dead meat when the British steam up along side with a battleship. The German counter to the Royal Navy was the Luftwaffe. Air attack with bombs and torpedoes will sink anything that floats. The Luftwaffe needed to achieve air superiority, namely beat down the RAF to the point where the slow and vulnerable Stuka's could operate over the channel without being bounced by RAF Spitfires. The Luftwaffe nearly achieved air superiority during the 1940 air battles, doing it the hard way, flying into British airspace and dog fighting with RAF Spitfires and Hurricanes. If they had concentrated upon knocking out the coastal radar stations, the sector stations, the air fields, and the aircraft factories they might have done it. All the British accounts of the Battle of Britain stress how close the Germans came to winning it.
Thirdly, Hitler could have given Rommel and the Afrika Korps more support. Rommel only had a couple of German divisions, going up against the British with eight to twelve divisions. A couple more divisions for Rommel taken from the 140 sent into Russia would have made all the difference in the middle east but wouldn't have made much difference on the eastern front. If the paratroops sent to take Crete had been used to take Malta instead, Rommel's supply lines across the Mediterranean would have been secure. Had Rommel taken Egypt, the Suez Canal, and the Iraq oilfields it would have solved Hitler's fuel problems, and dealt a crushing blow to the British.
Fourth, Hitler could have refrained from declaring war on the United States after Pearl Harbor. He had made no binding treaties with the Japanese, he didn't owe them anything. As it was, he made Roosevelt's job in pursuing a "Germany First" strategy far easier. And he drove the last nails into the American isolationist's coffin. Without Hitler's gratuitous declaration of war, the isolationists might have kept America out of the European war for months and months. For Hitler, locked in a death struggle with the British and the Soviets at the time, a delay of months in American belligerency is not to be sneezed at.
There are others, but the first four above are enough for this post. And a world where the Third Reich won would have been very bad indeed.
Tuesday, June 23, 2015
Marketing 102.
Manufacturer's with sense label their product with their name, "Made in USA", and the model number. This way the product itself serves as company advertising for the life of the product. Just came away from an estate auction, loads of cool stuff, very little of it marked with the maker's name.
And, don't change the model number until you redesign the product in a serious way. Model numbers like 747 and XP and GTO have staying power. Your model number might grow in name recognition if you didn't change it every season like Sears Roebuck used to do.
When doing TV ads, understand that we all have color TV now. Don't do your ads in black and white just cause someone at the ad agency thinks black and white looks cool. Color makes your product look better and more desirable than black and white. And you don't have to pay extra to do a TV ad in color, unlike in the old days when a color newspaper ad cost extra.
Your ad will be more effective if the product name is shown on screen and spoken by the announcer. Do this at the beginning of the ad. A huge number of loser ads fail to make it clear what they are peddling. You cannot tell if the ad is selling cars, or pretty girls, or Caribbean vacations or open road, or what.
The most important specification of anything is the price. Don't skip showing the price in ads. Some marketeers say that customers will be scared off when they see how much it will cost them. If this is the case, you need to do some cost reduction and get the price down to make the product look like a bargain. When an ad omits the price, I always figure the product will be too expensive for me, and I lose interest.
And, don't change the model number until you redesign the product in a serious way. Model numbers like 747 and XP and GTO have staying power. Your model number might grow in name recognition if you didn't change it every season like Sears Roebuck used to do.
When doing TV ads, understand that we all have color TV now. Don't do your ads in black and white just cause someone at the ad agency thinks black and white looks cool. Color makes your product look better and more desirable than black and white. And you don't have to pay extra to do a TV ad in color, unlike in the old days when a color newspaper ad cost extra.
Your ad will be more effective if the product name is shown on screen and spoken by the announcer. Do this at the beginning of the ad. A huge number of loser ads fail to make it clear what they are peddling. You cannot tell if the ad is selling cars, or pretty girls, or Caribbean vacations or open road, or what.
The most important specification of anything is the price. Don't skip showing the price in ads. Some marketeers say that customers will be scared off when they see how much it will cost them. If this is the case, you need to do some cost reduction and get the price down to make the product look like a bargain. When an ad omits the price, I always figure the product will be too expensive for me, and I lose interest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)