Sunday, February 22, 2009

Letter to Verdeim Software

Re: Edison PC Power Management Software

I installed Edison a few weeks ago, and found that I actually didn't need it, although thank you for helping me find the Power Options through the Control Panel.

I uninstalled the Edison software from Add/Remove programs, but it refuses to go away. I can go into the Power Controls and delete the Edison Power scheme, but when I reboot the computer, it reappears.

This is a problem because I am unable to control my computers power use at all now. When I walk away from the system for more than 10 minutes, it goes into a Stand By mode where the CD-Rom light, Hard Drive light and power light are continuously on, and I an unable to wake up the system through the keyboard or the mouse. I have to hold the power button down for about 6 seconds, and do a hard reset of my system, which causes me to lose anything that I am working on.

So, uninstalling did not work. The other option is to go into the Registry and clean it up so that the Edison power scheme stops reappearing in the Power Option Properties. Can I get help finding that in the Registry and getting rid of this problem once and for all?

Note to anyone reading. I don't recommend Edison PC Power Management. Just take control of how your system works through Power Options via the Control Panel.

Monday, February 16, 2009

About expanding Convention Place Station

I sat in a meeting of the House Committee on Community & Economic Development & Trade, and heard my own Rep. Scott White testifying about a bill he is sponsoring seeking to allow the construction of an expansion of the Washington State Convention and Trade Center on top of the transit center at Convention Place Station. Along with Rep. White, the CEO of the Trade center, a representative from the City of Seattle, and a union representative spoke in favor of the bill. I heard from the CEO that this project would employ 3,000 people during the construction, with further gains in long term employment thanks to the jobs created by the expanded convention center. There was another project mentioned that I wanted to look up, a hotel at the location of the Greyhound building downtown. Another potential 3,000 jobs plus long term employment for the hotel staff.

The Seattle Times wrote about the expansion project here:

The article says that it might compete with financing for a potential expansion of Key Arena. It will be interesting to see which of these projects gets the most attention.

Sunday, February 08, 2009

On Sir Edmund Burke

A mailing list post got me searching for information about a State Income Tax, and I found that Senator Franklin has introduced SB 5104, creating an Income Tax. Of course, I found this through the conservative bill tracking service,

And I got into it with some of the posters who were whining about spending, etc. Same argument as ever. Until I saw this comment from "glhadley":

What we really need are term limits and a restriction on voting to those who actually pay more taxes than they game the system for. If we could remove from the voting rolls, those who are simply voting for people who promise the most, we could really have a non-self-destructive society.

My answer was that he sounded like Edmund Burke:

The occupation of a hair-dresser, or of a working tallow-
chandler, cannot be a matter of honour to any person —
to say nothing of a number of other more servile em-
ployments. Such descriptions of men ought not to
suffer oppression from the state ; but the state suffers
oppression, if such as they, either individually or collec-
tively, are permitted to rule.

I found this quote on, and it got me reading a bit more. Burke goes onto quote Ecclesiasticus, Chapter 38, which I think he completely misunderstood. It talks about honoring labor, and that in spite of the fact that people who do hard work are rarely consulted in political matters 2,000+ years ago, they "they will maintain the state of the world, and all their desire is in the work of their craft."

Burke thought that the ancients were saying that the workers "should not" be consulted in politics. I read the passage as cynical lore, saying that even if they are not consulted, they maintain the foundations of our lives, and should be honored for it.

What do you think?

Tuesday, February 03, 2009

Answering the Cato Institute's NYTimes Ad

I'd rather have the government hire someone as a last resort for 40K per year than give a $100,000 tax cut to someone else and have the person who needs that 40K go begging for a job. Kind of rough, but if you look at the proposal that Bush put out in the 2000 election, giving a 500 Billion Dollar Tax Cut in order to "create 5 million jobs", that's what he was saying. If I need capital to start a business, I don't go to a rich friend, I go to a bank. (I don't have any rich friends, and don't really want any.) If my business idea has merit and if I can sell the idea that I would be able to earn money from it, the bank gives me a loan that I have to pay back. But even more important than that, I don't need financial capital to start a business, I just need demand for my product or service. Without that demand, I'll stay working for someone else.

If it were true that giving tax breaks and more financial capital to people at the top of the income ladder created more jobs, then wouldn't it also follow that giving ALL of our financial capital to THE richest person in the world would create the MOST jobs? That's what I call failed logic.

It IS true that by giving more money to people who will spend most of their income increases demand for products and services. It does NOT follow that giving all of our financial capital to everyone equally would create paradise. But at least people would be able to eat, live in a house, go to a doctor and send their kids to good schools.

The Brookings Institute is here:

The Cato Institute is here:

Conservative Economics, also called "Supply Side" economics, has failed. It failed in the 1920's and created the Great Depression. It failed in 1981 and created the Recession of the early '80's, but Congress didn't have the guts to reverse the tax cuts. Those policies started being reversed in 1993, but the 1994 election (thanks to the broadcasts and illusions cast by people from the CATO Institute and other groups like them) stopped it. Now we might have another chance to fix the mess, put regulation back to work trying to protect our country against fraud and abuse. But I would expect that Congress still won't have the guts to restore the top marginal tax rates to what they should be. If we don't do that, then the fraud and abuse will be coming from the people with the most finanical capital, able to buy and sell elected offices.

If "supply side" were true, then retailers would want to maximize inventory so they have whatever their customers want to buy. Retailers instead try to keep inventory to a minimum, because inventory is a cost, and unsold inventory is a loss. Would you rather have a few people who can afford multi-million dollar homes, or a LOT of people who can afford homes that they can be proud of?

The role of government is to establish and maintain a foundation for the private sector to build on. Without that foundation, everything falls apart. Physical, financial, social and legal foundations are what make our country as great as it is. Selling off that infrastructure in bits and pieces so that private corporations can make money off selling services for higher prices than should be charged for basic needs like water, electricity and other elements of the commons is the best way to destroy that foundation. That's what we've seen happen over the last 8 years, and for the 20 years before that.