Is Health Care A Right?

Two levels on which I don't agree that health care is a right. The first level is that, if it is a right, it is definitely not a protected right under the constitution.  If we as a nation define it as a right by adding it as an amendment or addition to the Bill of Rights, then it would become protected.  When the Bill of Rights was written as a compromise for those who questioned the Federalist notion of a constitution and a central government, hospitals and doctors existed.  If the non-Federalists had felt that healthcare was an inalienable right they would have asked for its inclusion into the Bill of Rights, because they basically asked for everything else they could think of. Good thing they did; Imagine being without the Bill of Rights, which is what the Federalists wanted until it was obvious they needed a compromise.

The second level is on what constitutes a right.  What are rights, and where do they come from?  I have always questioned that, and recently questioned it again in regards to whether I should think health care is a right or not.  If it is, I want to be behind it as a defender of rights.  If it is not, I want to explain why not.

Fundamentally:

• A right is rooted in, and constituted of, principles defining the ability to act.

• Rights come from the obligation of others to keep themselves from violating your ability to act.  In other words, rights are negative obligations - weighty responsibilities.   

What we know:

• The need for health care in a time of sickness is not an act.

• Society has only defined certain obligations of doctors in times of emergency, sickness, or need - and complete health care is not one of them.  

So, health care is not a right, but a privilege given to us unvoluntarily (i.e., at a price) by others who possess (which is a right) and have obtained (which is a right) the skills necessary to do so.

True rights do not infringe on another person's rights.  My right in the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to an attorney, right to a fair trial, or any other, should not and do not take away from another's same rights.

If health care was, or could be, a right, how could it be so without taking away the rights of others?

As stated above, I currently have the right to an attorney, but I have to pay for it out of pocket or request one (the act), and the right is given to me to defend me from accusation of my peers (The People, who are under that obligation).  If the People of my State decide to accuse me, I should (and do) have the right to defend myself against them.

However, in the case of a medical need, it usually occurs by natural cause.  The People did not inflict the medical need upon me, so I have no right for a doctor to be provided (there is no act and no obligation).  But I do have the right to hire (a right) one and receive treatment if I have obtained the ability (a right) to do so.

Of course, there are always a few exceptions and further explanations and arguments to these types of philosophies which would take much more time to write than I have.  Such as what happens when The People do inflict harm on someone - then does that person have a right to receive care?  Most judges or juries would rule yes and I agree with that.  Notice, however, that the right is usually alienable, meaning it can be transferred, or it is only for the duration of the treatment of the harm caused.  It normally would not include any and all medical care, as the alienable right was given because The People infringed on that person's right to be left alone.  (See Francis Hutcheson)

One last example, my right to legal representation can still be exercised (therefore it is inalienable) even if all of the lawyers were to leave the world, and none were available to represent me.  In that case, I become my own advocate and represent myself.  The right has not been reduced or transferred from me based on the lawyers' decisions to leave.  On the other hand, if all of the doctors were to leave the world, how would I exercise my right to health care, beyond the rights I already have to take care of and make decisions for myself?

The fact that health care is not a right does not mean we should not be charitable and help where we are able.  It means we should be careful about what types of weighty responsibilities we add to the burdens we share as Americans.  Balance is a notion that we tend to forget about but is symbolically everywhere in the foundations and inner workings of our country.  I believe there is good wisdom in that.

Follow-up: How To Short Sell The Oil Companies

In a previous article, I wrote about how we can collectively work against the oil companies to help improve gasoline prices.  (See the previous article before reading further if you haven't read it already.  Then come back to this article.) We should keep doing that, as now traders and firms like Goldman Sachs are seeing that demand might not be meeting with supply, and oil has been off its highs so far this week.  Keep it up America!

In full disclosure, I am not currently short on oil.  In fact, I am actually long DBO ETFs in one of my portfolios, and have no plans to change my position anytime soon.  I think energy long term is a good play.  But gasoline prices are too high, and unsustainable (in my view) at these levels, and I believe could impact the economy come summer time (like we saw in the perfect market storm of 2008).  I do have another interest in seeing fuel prices decrease, and that is I need to book some flights to Hawaii soon and would love to see some benefits in reduced airfare from lower aviation fuel prices.  Long shot, I know, but I can hope!

I also have seen other researchers write similar things about other commodities, such as food related goods.  Below is what Smartmoney.com had to say on the topic of stockpiling (which is what are doing in effect when we fill our tanks to the brim instead of just filling with a half tank more frequently).

Consider this example.  There are over an estimated 247 million registered vehicles in the US.  The average tank size is around 20 gallons.  That means, if we are keeping our tanks above half full, we are storing between 4.94 billion (at full) and 2.47 billion (at half full) gallons of gasoline, at our cost, not the oil companies' cost.  We are storing billions of gallons of gasoline for FREE, so that we can drive around town for a week without filling up (even though most cities and towns have a plethora of fueling stations along the routes we drive).  Imagine what would happen if we were storing a half tank or less of gasoline (less than or equal to 2.47 billion).  We would immediately stick almost 2.5 billion gallons of product back on the oil companies' "shelves", since their numbers are set to meet the demand at that rate of draw.  How's that for some perspective?

Smartmoney.com:
...

There's also an unintended consequence of stockpiling, says David Bell, a professor of marketing at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business: You'll actually end up using more of what you've stockpiled than you would otherwise. In theory, doubling the number of soda cases bought would result in a supply that lasts twice as long, but it's more likely that you'll go through it faster, or simply be less frugal about its use with extra on hand. You could even end up throwing out food that expires, rejecting out-of-fashion items, or simply forgetting about the cans of corn stashed behind the hats and mittens in the basement.

Still, buying before prices rise can be smart – in small doses. Most supermarket and drugstore items go on sale just once every 10 to 12 weeks, says Teri Gault, founder of The Grocery Game. If you're loyal to a certain brand, buying extra when you spot a sale is smarter than paying full price the following week when you're actually out. On fashion, retailers sneak in bigger price increases on trend items because consumers can't easily monitor cost like they do for wardrobe staples such as trousers and T-shirts, says Tennant. Many of those items are available now at end-of-season clearances, and can be picked up for a song. And avoiding hyped-up eBay ( EBAY: 29.98*, -0.46, -1.51% ) prices on discontinued items by stocking up is usually a sound strategy, too.

Ultimately, the decision may come down to cash flow. If charging six months worth of dry goods means paying extra interest charges on credit card debt, it's not worth the savings, says Randy Allen, an associate dean for The Johnson School at Cornell University.

Read more: Will Stockpiling Save You Money? - SmartMoney.com http://www.smartmoney.com/spending/budgeting/will-stockpiling-save-you-money-1298583519761/#ixzz1Gm8Ox5Y4

Additional notes: When gasoline is sitting in your tank, it is evaporating.  Why pay out of your pocket just to let more droplets of gasoline disappear on your dime.  Make the oil companies pay that expense themselves by buying less gasoline at each fuel-up, which forces them to store more gasoline and worry about their own storage tanks' evaporation rates.  While many articles show that the evaporation rates are pretty negligible (less than 1 gallon per year at 60 degrees Fahrenheit), I still need to do some more research on what the rates are like when it is over 90 degrees like most of America is during the summer months.  Also, when liquids slosh around, there is more evaporation.  There are also arguments about cars that have evaporation collection systems which reuse gasoline that might help mitigate your losses.  Additionally, E10 or higher Ethanol gasoline is said to evaporate even more due to the alcohol content.


However, even if you are not benefiting from less evaporation, you may stand to benefit from increased gas mileage by not hauling around so much liquid in your tank.  As the power of your engine increases (4 cyl, V6, V8) the benefits decrease: meaning you'll see better gas mileage for half tanks in a 4 cyl than you will in a V8.  But remember, these are just added benefits, so if you don't receive these benefits because your car is bigger or has cool vapor catching gizmos, it doesn't matter.  The bigger benefit is short selling the oil companies, over-supplying them with excess inventory, by not filling up a full tank when you go to the pump.  They will soon see that they have too much gasoline product on hand and reduce the price to get rid of it.


If interested, you can read more on efficiencies here:


http://www.creditinfocenter.com/wordpress/2008/07/24/increase-mileage-gas-tank-full-or-half-empty/

Economics of Gasoline - How To Short Sell The Oil Companies

High gas prices are back.  It's time to review ways to save money on gas.

But I don't intend to talk about conserving gas through substitution to biking, running, or riding the bus to work.  The problem of high fuel prices goes far beyond that, and could easily cause setbacks in the US economic recovery - if there really is one.

Let's start with good ol' reliable supply and demand.  Prices are higher right now because the traders who buy oil on the commodities exchanges are saying with their pocket books that the supply of safe, reliable production of oil is heading lower relative to demand.  Whether we agree with their assessment is irrelevant.  But what is clear is that we need to shift the supply curve to the right to get prices to come down.  If the traders won't do that, how can we as consumers do it?

Before I go further, I'll point to some interesting info regarding the last time oil had a huge run.  In 2008 saw oil a peak price at  $145.29 on July 3.  Just 10 days later, President George W. Bush announced a repeal of the offshore drilling ban, and oil made a steep and steady decline (along with the economy) to well below $50 per barrel by December 2008.  I don't believe for a second that Bush intended to allow drilling - it was simply  a bluff, an ace in the back pocket.  Even if he did intend to allow drilling, it would have taken years to get production on line.  However, the mere chance that more supply could be coming on line in future years was enough to help the price come down; way down.

Remember, oil is traded in futures contracts.  The futures are trying to predict what the price of oil should be in the coming months.

So, again, how can we as consumers get the price of oil to fall?  Answer: we can use the properties of distribution models and futures trading against the oil companies, and force them to sell gas at lower prices.

Distribution models are everywhere, and these days they are run with high efficiency.  Imagine a tanker filling up with oil right now at a port in Alaska.  There is a port somewhere in Texas expecting that tanker to come to port in the near future.  At that port in Texas, there is a pipeline company expecting to transport the oil from the tanker, and eventually route it to an oil refinery somewhere in the mid-west.  That oil refinery is expecting the oil to come in so they can make gasoline and other products.  There is a distributor expecting to haul that gasoline to nearby stations, and stations that are expecting to sell the gasoline at a certain volume per week.  All of this is done with "just in time" precision to ensure that enough gasoline is on hand to the members down the chain at a time when it is needed.

That's where we come in.

Instead of filling our cars full of gasoline every time we stop to fill - and hauling it around while using it slowly, meanwhile letting the oil companies take our money for gasoline we will not use until sometime in the future - fill up with a half tank of gas, or better, a set dollar amount (that is at or below a half tank), keeping more of your money in your pocket, and paying less upfront for future consumption.  We will be placing "puts" on their future price of oil by paying less in advance for gasoline we'll burn in the future.

Our tank shorting will do two things immediately.  One, it will immediately increase the amount of gasoline inventory every station has on hand relative to their normal draw rates.  When the distribution company comes to fill the tanks for the station, they will not dump as much gasoline off their tanker trucks.  With less gasoline leaving the storage tanks of refineries, they will have to slow production (or pay money to someone else to store the excess gasoline).  Reduced production would mean less oil draw from their pipelines, which would mean the pipeline companies would have to store more offloaded oil from tankers (or pay someone else to store it).  Rather than do that, they offload less oil from the tanker.  The tanker sits in port longer now, since the offloading rate is slowed.  Meaning the tanker company now starts a dispute with the purchaser of the oil over who will pay the costs of the extended stay at port.  Meantime, another ship is already on its way to port with more oil.  That tanker arrives while the other tanker is still docked.  Now the tanker company has to pay to dock the second tanker, effectively "storing" the oil.

Two, rather than allow this backlog to happen and disrupt the supply chain, the oil companies will try to entice us back to the pump by reducing the price of gasoline in an attempt to ease the onslaught of higher inventories.   This action would effectively take some wind out of the sails of the futures prices of oil, which would further reduce the price of gasoline over time.

Let's get started America.

Response In Favor of Utah's Immigration Compact - Specifically HB116

The title of this article includes a link to a youtube post I did were I talk further of my support for the Utah Immigration Laws that were passed today.  Be sure to listen to parts one, two, and three.  In case you need them, each of the links are also provided below.

I will say this as a lead in to the discussion.  The Utah Republicans had better think before they cause an uproar within the Utah Republican Party over this by using the primaries to oust politicians that supported this bill.  The last time something similar happened, and on a national scale, was when the Immigration Reform Act created a huge divide within the Repubs in May of 2006.   That fall, the divided Republicans couldn't overcome their stronger Democratic counterparts, and lost big time.  The momentum carried into the Presidential Election, and Obama was elected in.

If Utah Republicans are not careful, we may see something similar happen where less-conservative-more-moderate people like me relinquish support of the party as these party line delegates push their ultra-right candidates through the primaries.  That would likely lead to our first Democratic governor in quite some time, and possibly a Democratic legislature.

But beyond that, this issue is about doing what's right and an enforcement policy mixed with a guest worker program is a great solution, and says to Washington, wake up, or let the States decide on the issues you fail to take up!

Taco Bell's Hellish Heat

Some have jokingly called Taco Bell "Taco Hell" for some time, and now it seems like the company may be in trouble as litigation over the question of "what beef is" catches America's attention.

But before we get all riled up about something corporate, I want to pose a question.  Is it really that big of a deal?  Allow me to explain my reasons for questioning.

It's not that I think fast food is great and that people, restaurants, and food producers shouldn't do more to ensure that there is nutritional value to food.  That is especially the case now that we have the real possibility of universal health care.  If we all have to pay in, I want to be sure that Joe Plumber is eating foods that will sustain him and his health so that he's not overusing the health system.

But the question is, does Taco Bell's beef, or lack thereof, really pose a health issue?  Or a false advertising issue at that?  Take a minute and think about it.  How many mom's since the invention of meatloaf have used "extenders" when making meat based foods?  How many restaurants initially used "french" in french fries, french toast, etc. to make the food name sound exotic when it wasn't.  Isn't that false advertising?

Meatloaf itself has all kinds of stuff in it, that isn't meat, but you don't see lawyers lining up to say that it can't be called 'meat' loaf anymore.  Think of the ingredients: eggs, milk, butter, bread crumbs, seasonings, oils, etc., none of which are even close to the meat department.  Sounds like it should be called breakfast-for-dinner loaf instead.  Isn't all Taco Bell is doing with things like maltodextrin (sweetener), and soy lecithin, isolated oats similar to what your mother does with meats she prepares?  

So the plaintiffs want Taco Bell to have to call their whatever-you-call-it something more like "Taco Meat Filling" instead of beef.  Sound's appetizing doesn't it?  I knew that fast food menu's took after the Chinese menu, but I thought it was the numbering part, not the bad way of explaining what it is you're eating part.

I think most Americans are thinking along the same lines... at least non-scientific polls seem to be showing that.  It also seems that Taco Bell knows that as well, and is adding some humor to the situation by releasing this ad.

Come on America, let's focus on other issues at hand.  Sure, we need to be healthy.  But food is one of those things that man has been experimenting with for a long, long time.  And the whole point of it is to mix things together that make the prepared food much better than it was naturally.  Humans have been eating "badly" by our current definitions for millennia, but we've gotten to this point, haven't we?  Lets move on.

Craziest Campaign Speech of the Year - Phil Davison

Wow, I had to post this transcript I made of Phil Davison's words to the Executive Committee, and infamously to the rest of us through video.  What a crazy speech that was.  It was like watching Matt Foley turned Treasurer Candidate from his normal role as a motivational speaker...in other words, like watching a train wreck.  But it makes for some good entertainment now, thanks to YouTube!  If only Chris Farley were still around to have seen it.

If you've yet to see it, click the YouTube link (the article title), and follow along in the text.

Phil Davison's words on September 8th, 2010:

Ladies and gentlemen,
of the Star County Republican Party Executive Committee,
good evening,

And thank you,
not only for your attendance,
but for allowing me the opportunity to speak.

My name is Phil Davison,
and I am seeking our party's nomination,
for the position of Star County Treasurer,
on November 10th...November of 2010 excuse me.

In terms of my background,
I am from the village of Minerva,
where I am serving my 13th year of elected service,
as a Minerva council member.

In terms of education,
I have a bachelors degree in sociology,
a bachelors degree in history,
a masters degree in public administration,
and a masters degree in communication.

In terms of elections across Star County,
I have represented our party twice on the county ballot,
in both the primary and the general elections,
when I ran for Star County Clerk of Courts in 1996,
and Star County Commissioner in 2000,
and I will not apologize for my tone tonight.

I have been a Republican in times good,
and I have been a Republican in times bad.

Albert Einstein issued one of my most favorite quotes,
in the history of the spoken word,
And it is as follows:

In the middle of opportunity...oh...excuse me...
"in the middle of difficulty lies opportunity..."
I'm going to repeat that so I have clarity tonight:
"in the middle of difficulty lies opportunity."

This is the opportunity we've been waiting for,
The Star County Treasurers Office is a mess,
It is in dire need of structure and guidance
And now is the time to seize this opportunity,

With an aggressive campaign,
and an even more aggressive campaigner.
If nominated tonight I promise each and every person in this room,
I will hit the ground running,
come out swinging, and end up winning!

Let's send the message tonight
To the people of Star County,
and to the people of the Star County Democratic Party,
We're tired of business as usual.

Drastic times require what?...
Drastic measures! YES! Who said that??
Thank YOU!
Drastic times require drastic measures!

We will not tolerate incompetence,
and irresponsibility any longer,
Now is the time to snap
the democratic stranglehold on the treasurers office. ?

And I hearken back to what my friend Alex just said.
He ran against the Treasurer in 1996,
It was a problem then,
Its a problem now.

Infestation

Politics is not touch football,
Politics is winner take all.
It always has been,
And it always will be.

If nominated tonight, I want to develop and expand my campaign,
For what I believe is the greatest strength of the Star County Republican Party,
and that is its people.

I believe, in the axiom,
That all politics is local.
And because of this belief,
I want to harness the thoughts and ideas,
That individuals in our party have.

Concerning Star County and its political subdivisions...
and use that to its fullest extent.
Knowledge is power.

Lets tap into this knowledge,
and use it as a tool to win the Treasure's Office.
Lets use this knowledge not only as a tool,
but as a weapon.

We must win this election,
If nominated tonight I will win this election,
And I'm going to say that again so there is no miscommunication tonight,
If nominated tonight I WIN!

Tell your Friends
Tell your neighbors,
Tell Randy Gonzalez,
I'm coming, both barrels, guns loaded.

I believe in the entities in the principles,
of the National Republican Party,
The State of Ohio Republican Party,
And the Star County Republican Party.

And if nominated I will not hide those beliefs,
On my march to victory on election day.
If nominated today I can guarantee with 100% certainty,
that what you are seeing from me tonight,
Is what everyone else outside those doors is going to get over the next eight weeks.

I used to be an idealistic figure,
I am now a pragmatic figure.
Government may be about service,
politics is about winning.

Tonight as a candidate, seeking the Republican nomination for the position of Star

County Treasurer, I humbly ask for your vote as members of the Star County Republican

Party Executive Committee.

Thank you!

Java Wars: The 20 Year Saga

James Gosling

         On April 12, 2010, the father of the Java Programming Language, James Gosling resigned from his position as the Chief of Technology at Oracle, citing his reasoning as “just about anything I could say that would be accurate and honest would do more harm than good” (Time To Move On). Oracle had recently completed its acquisition of Sun Microsystems where Gosling had worked as the creator of Java for over twenty years. Why was the creator of one of the most important computing technologies of the last thirty years leaving his post at such a critical time for the technology, a technology even Larry Ellison, founder and CEO of Oracle, heralded as “the most important software that we have ever acquired”? (Mr. Ellison Helps Himself)
         Gosling’s departure is sure add increased pressure to its growth and affect the direction Java moves in the next few years. Java has recently been transitioning from a “server side” technology to become increasingly viable as a “client side” technology (The Future of Java).  Part of that transition is due to Google’s usage of the Java technology to drive its Android phone platform.  As the pressure increases, the Java of today will become much different tomorrow, for better or for worse.  Why does the future of Java matter?  If history is any indication, the direction Java takes will forecast where computing technology as a whole will end up.
          

Java Logo

     Java was derived from the powerful computing languages of C and C++, known generally as Object Oriented Programming Languages or OOPLs. Gosling felt that OOPL programmers could benefit from getting rid of painful programming procedures 
of the other two languages, as well as introducing a fast Virtual Machine to compile the code and create increased interoperability.  This started the intellectual warfare between C++ boosters and Java junkies that still rages on today (The JVM Spec). Yet Java is so widely used, it can be found powering everything from DVR machines to DVD players, to computer applications and cell phones, to some of the most advanced high-transaction server farms, datacenters, and web servers. The control and advancement of such an important technology platform as Java, the training and needs of its programmers, and the applications built on the platform, should bring Larry Ellison household recognition that rivals that of Bill Gates or Steve Jobs; or will Google’s Eric Schmidt cloud out Larry Ellison’s eclipse of Sun?

Eric Schmidt

          In 1983, Eric Schmidt joined none other than Sun Microsystems, at nearly the same time as Java author James Gosling. From the beginnings, Sun was setting up to be at the forefront of technological change and importance, a position they would hold for almost three decades. Schmidt’s first role at Sun was that of a software manager and would later work with Gosling on Java. Gosling was assigned, among many other things, to development projects such as the WYSIWYG editor (What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get) that kicked off desktop publishing, a software platform called NeWS that was implemented in the early Macintosh systems to rival Windows. In the early 1990’s, he worked on the Oak programming language (The JVM Spec), and when Oak failed to gain much traction by 1995, Gosling and others at Sun decided to rewrite Oak as an Internet technology. When they introduced the rewritten platform as Java, it caught on like wildfire. At the end of its debut year in 1995, it had been licensed by almost every major corporation, including IBM, Oracle, and Microsoft. Gosling was an overnight success story, and in 1995 Schmidt and Gosling were put in charge of pushing Java into the mainstream and overseeing its development. In one short year, Java had revolutionized computing by allowing software to be developed and run on any computer on the Internet (Kilbane, Doris).

Cross Platform Logo

        

     Before the cross-platform capabilities of Java were introduced, software had to be developed in consideration to the operating system it would run on. However, in an increasingly networked world, this fact was becoming extremely burdensome for many computers trying to communicate yet running different operating systems. With Java, websites could deliver content in less development time and without specialized programming in relation to the operating system of the computer accessing the site. Before long, programmers everywhere were developing applets, applications, and websites that could freely run on any system imaginable, especially on Apple and Microsoft machines. Among the first major applications to spring from the Java frenzy was the Netscape Navigator web browser that quickly became the de-facto browser for the net. Interestingly, the Netscape Navigator software was the central reason the US Department of Justice began the antitrust case against Microsoft. Therefore, Java was at the very root of the largest antitrust case in US history that once again demonstrated the surprising power it now held over Silicon Valley, the newly founded Information Age, and Microsoft.
        Microsoft was an early adopter of the Java technology. Yet almost immediately, the behemoth was internally troubled by the idea that its flagship product –Windows– could be pre-empted by software written in Java. Software could now be independent of the Windows Operating System, and better internet browsing could be done on a Java based browser. As Microsoft began to demand more input on the specifications for the Java language, it also began rewriting parts of it for their own language called J++, marking the first time an attempt was made to fragment Java. Lawsuits began to fly, further evidencing just how important Java had become. Whoever controlled it would gain major market share in the Internet space, whether it be servers, browsers, or applet support for the millions of websites that were being created. And Microsoft wanted just that.
         Sun was well aware that Microsoft coveted their Java platform, shown by Gosling’s disdainful testimony in court against Microsoft, saying “I just don't trust them. The planet is littered with companies that did deals with Microsoft expecting to win big but ended up getting totally screwed,” and proposing  further that the Microsoft rewrite of Java was “…analogous to adding to the English language words and phrases that cannot be understood by anyone else" (Leaders of the Information Age). 

Bill Gates

         Microsoft, and their patriarch Bill Gates, had very little ground for a counter-argument. In fact, in a parallel case to that of Sun vs.    Microsoft, the prosecutor in the People vs. Microsoft case uncovered evidence that Gates had written an email to another Microsoft executive with the scheming words of “…how do we wrest control of Java away from Sun?” (Videotaped Disposition 69) To which Gates affirmed, reluctantly under oath, that he had discussed the issue with others in the company through email. Microsoft’s solution to the suits in part was to simply write their own Java language, known as C#, which is part of the .NET platform and represents the first official and highly successful rewrite of Java, though the naysayer will claim that C# was not a rewrite.  If it wasn’t, whatever happened to J++?  Many also argued that Java would now be doomed, since the .NET platform would surely spread everywhere Windows went.
         However, Java and its developers were resilient and were not about to let Java disappear into the catacombs of computer science; continuing to fight for its success –they very well changed the course of the 1990s, and they would very well change the course of the 2000s. Eric Schmidt, who had manned the post of CTO at Sun from 1995 to 1998, and helped lead the expansion of Java into prominence, soon left to work for Novell as their CEO. Novell was like a bright pulsar in business terms, entering into the game with huge amounts of flair and potentially groundbreaking technologies. Their mainstay was producing software for networks, which at the time, wasn’t normally built into an Operating System. But like any typical pulsar, Novell’s business was rapidly fading. Schmidt was determined that he could right the ship and save the company, and use a major network software component – Java – to do so.
          Fortunately for many of us today, the plan didn’t go as Schmidt had planned, and customers were still wary of purchasing products from Novell. Moreover, when the roaring economy of the nineties was about to become terminal in 2000, Schmidt decided to leave for greener pastures.

Google Logo

          Mountain View, California is lushly green in foliage and money, and it was there in 1996 that Sergey Brin and Larry Page were coding up a revolution for the Internet that no one saw coming. As their new technology continued to prove promising in test labs and small releases at Stanford University, its popularity flourished rapidly. By the year 2000, Google was its own company and was becoming a key player in the search engine role, and expanding daily. Brin and Page tapped Schmidt to take over as the CEO of Google in 2001, who brought along with him the personal networks and relations to the people at Sun Microsystems, especially the people working on Java (Current Biography).
         The resurgence of Java in the early part of the last decade can arguably be attributed to its adoption by Google. While it is hard to affix a date or exact time that Google decided to use Java as one of its core technologies, there can’t be much doubt that Schmidt’s move to Google in 2001 had a lot to do with it becoming central to their operations. We also know that Google played a major role in advancing Java to the popular Java 5 release in 2005, when it already powered most of their platforms and APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) during which time Google had also become the world’s dominant search engine. Responding to Robert Eckstein’s question “How does Google use Java technology”, Google Software Engineer Li Moore explained that “Google makes extensive use of the Java platform. Large parts of popular Google products are written in Java. We also use Java in many internal systems and products under development” (Sun Talks With Li).
          Through Google’s continual use of Java for internal development which pushed the language to new frontiers, developers of non-Google and non-web related platforms also stood to benefit from the advancements being added to the language, such as JavaFX, enumerations, and other key features that had been requested seemingly since its release in 1995. This, along with the later Java 6 release, helped to buoy the attractiveness of the Java platform for nearly the entire last decade, and only recently was it surpassed in search engine popularity by the C language (‘Rudderless Java’). Some will say that is an indication that Java is beginning to lose relevance; yet, it would seem otherwise with a broader viewpoint that C is the base of the language used to program for the iPhone, a language Apple calls Objective-C, which naturally would drive its popularity in search engines as developers look to create apps for the exploding iPhone app market. Nevertheless, Java is close behind and will retake the top spot as the Android platform races to overtake the iPhone platform’s popularity – unless war ensues.

Larry Ellison

          Since its reinvention as a core programming language in 1995, Oracle has been another key player in the Java story. The company founded by Larry Ellison, and one that thrives on acquisitions, has subtly made Ellison and his investors tens of billions of dollars in wealth. Their main customers are mid-to-large size businesses in need of database architectures and powerful business software such as PeopleSoft. Since Java has always been a major player in the world of business and enterprise programming, Oracle’s support of the language makes quite a bit of sense. Beyond pure Internet technology, one of Java’s main usages in businesses is running enterprise applications on remote servers, and serving up the data from those applications to client computers. By supporting Java, Oracle has banked on the idea that Java programmers would use the powerful Oracle DB (database) platform which their Java code could access and use seamlessly (Interview With Dan McDonald).
          That mission for seamless integration of Oracle DB with Java has largely paid off, with only the MySQL database platform as a rival in implementation with Java. Additionally, Oracle has made their database platform fully programmable using Java, making it the only database system to use an object oriented language in conjunction with SQL. Database administrators and programmers normally have to rely purely on SQL (the end-all of database scripting languages) to write to and access the database information, and a modified version of procedural languages such as C to program stored procedures and operations for the database (Interview With Dan McDonald). This is usually very tedious and is prone to human errors since there are few ways to debug the code and the language itself is limited. Implementing an OOPL like Java creates powerful opportunities for data warehousing and applications administration; which is what Oracle wants.

Oracle Logo

         Being a software conglomerate like Google, Microsoft, and Apple, Oracle rules the business space in many aspects, and seems to be constantly driven by acquisition and seeking a bigger share of the business computing arena. Since a massive portion of the business enterprise software and internal applications in the world use Java, having control over the language gives Oracle some leverage to wield more power over business operations that have been programmed in Java into specific directions. Having exposure like that to business needs has definitely got to have significant value, not necessarily monetary value, rather value in creating vertical market share for Oracle’s other open source and proprietary products. Don’t imagine for any small amount of time that companies like Microsoft weren’t completely blindsided by the thought of a powerhouse such as Oracle garnering that type of command through Java. “I am very surprised. I have to think about it,” was all Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer could say about the Oracle announcement in April of 2009 (Mr. Ellison Helps Himself). Such a short, fragmented statement by one of the industry’s sharpest corporate leaders shows he must have been pale-faced when he said it. What was Oracle positioning for? The next software empire? Some sort of software federation with Google to double team Microsoft and its virtual fortress?
          The answer to both questions is yes. In an interview with Dan McDonald from the Eccles School of Business on the future of Java, he explained that “Oracle has a much better track record [than Sun] at actually creating usable products in Java.  So, while they may not be as good of a language steward from the theoretical standpoint, Oracle may just produce a more functional result” (Interview With Dan McDonald). Many businesses that develop applications in Java do so independently and for the most part in-house. If Oracle can start developing software applications for businesses that are both distributed and customized for customers using their own development teams at Oracle, they will gain a huge advantage in the business software space. So is Oracle going to make office software for client release to compete with MS? No, because the movement of software is toward what they call “the cloud”. Cloud computing is the idea that everything should be stored and run through the Internet by accessing remote servers in co-located and clustered server farms. The advantages to this are long uptimes, centralized maintenance, and defense against disasters and crippling data loss to business operations. This is something that Java should excel at, since it is mainly a server-side platform.

Cloud Computing

          The antagonist would argue that cloud computing requires huge investments in server infrastructure, and not just software languages and platforms like Solaris, Java, and MySQL. Recall, nonetheless, that Sun Microsystems was mainly a hardware company, selling server clusters and powerful mainframe computing systems, and also hosting them in server farms, as their core business. Those assets and technologies are all on Oracle’s books now. Furthermore, Oracle is expanding their data center space beyond what they inherited from Sun, which is a key component to growing a cloud based business model. In an article announcing the resumed construction on their extensive data center project in the greater Salt Lake City area, industry analyst Ray Wang forecasted “A good amount of everything new [at Oracle] is going to go in that direction…It wouldn't be inconceivable to see 50 percent of Oracle's business in the cloud by 2014." (Kanaracus, Chris)
          And why wouldn’t they? With Google applications as an exception, Java hasn’t been used as much for cloud computing applications like email, web documents, Twitter, etc. This has mostly been left to JavaScript (which has no relation to Java at all), PHP, Ruby on Rails, Python, and other similar languages. Oracle will want to change that by moving in on the cloud computing space with Java as a key component, just like Google has done. As Oracle positions Java to lead the cloud movement of software, what will happen to all of those legacy cloud applications written in JavaScript and the like? The good news for those applications is that Google and other Java proponents have already made it possible to write code in Java, and have the JVM create perfectly accurate JavaScript. The creators of cloud applications who want to move into Java once it is optimized for cloud computing will not have a hard time doing so, meaning programmers who know and develop in Java will be able to move right in to those development teams, only increase the momentum of Java’s adaptation into cloud computing (Schalk, Chris).

Android Logo

         The one thing that could impact that momentum would be a severance of ties between the major backers of Java. Fragmentation of the Java Platform is a real possibility for a few specific reasons. The Dalvik VM developed by Google for Android is yet to be accepted by the Java community –under the control of Sun –as real Java. If Google continues to develop new technologies into their platform, those features will not necessarily be adapted into Java, and vice versa. In software, this tends to create issues where the diversions between the branched code are too wide to merge back together, causing a fork in the code. Google prepared for this scenario, evidenced by recent complaints from them that Java has not advanced fast enough under Sun, and by sponsoring their own adaptations of the platform. Oracle also has not been forthcoming enough about their direction and plans for Java, which leaves many who rely on the platform nervous about its prospects. If Google forks the code, an epic exodus of programming minds and skills would ensue, leaving Java devoid of the needed ingenuity to keep it relevant.
         Some within Google insist this will not happen, and that in fact Oracle will be a better company for Java than Sun was. Google’s Chief Java Architect, Josh Bloch, made the diagnosis that “The king is not dead. The king is alive and well. He has a slight cold" (‘Rudderless’ Java). Even still, Loch conceded that a fork in Java is not unlikely if a shift in direction is not made soon; a shift in Google’s favor and to their demands. Will the strange bedfellows of Google and Oracle join together, with Google expanding Java within the mobile space, and Oracle expanding Java in the business services space, and both of them working in parallel on cloud services? Or will the allies turn on each other now that the diplomatic mediator and near hippie-like philosophic viewpoints of Sun are gone?

Java Sandbox

         We should hope that they both get along in the sandbox. A union or pact between the two would fuel the next decade of information technology and keep Microsoft in check. The advancements that would occur and the relentless storm of cloud based software that would arise would revolutionize our connected world many times over. Tools once relegated to desktops and mainframe systems would become feasible for use on mobile devices as Java drives the communication between them and the supercomputer-like cloud servers. Business or government executives would be able to access a myriad of organizational data on the fly. There is no telling where Java’s momentum could carry it, or how many other big players would join in its development even if it means jettisoning support of other languages. But no matter what happens, whether Java becomes an a-la-carte mixture more like a mocha or a latte than a straight coffee, Java will find a way to continue on. HP’s Vijay Seetharaman touted that “Java will remain a dominant platform in the enterprise space" (‘Rudderless’ Java), meaning the “king” of computer programming languages will continue to drive business as it has for a decade and a half. Indeed with a new fusion of brilliance, and with Sun gone the way of the Death Star, the world could be made to revolve around Java.

Works Cited
Eaddy, Marc. Dr. Dobbs Journal: C# Versus Java (2001): 1-13. Print.
Eckel, Bruce. Thinking in Java. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2006. Print.
Eckstein, Robert. "Sun Microsystems Talks With Li Moore of Google." Developer Resources for Java Technology. Web. 23 July 2010. .
Gosling, James. "Time to Move On... : On a New Road." Time to Move On. 12 Apr. 2010. Web. 27 June 2010. .
The H. W. Wilson Company. "Schmidt, Eric." Current Biography (2008): 1. Biorgraphy Reference Bank Select Edition. Web.
How The JVM Spec Came to Be. Prod. InfoQ. Perf. James Gosling. How The JVM Spec Came To Be. 28 Oct. 2008. Web. 27 June 2010. .
"Interview With Dan McDonald." E-mail interview. 6 July 2010.
Jackson, Joab. "Google Exec Worries Over 'rudderless' Java - PCWorld Business Center." Reviews and News on Tech Products, Software and Downloads - PCWorld. Web. 23 July 2010. .
Kanaracus, Chris. "Oracle Resumes Construction of Massive Data Center - PCWorld Business Center." Reviews and News on Tech Products, Software and Downloads - PCWorld. Web. 23 July 2010. .
Kilbane, Doris. "From Sneaking Into Computer Labs To Sneaking Out Java." Electronic Design: 49. Academic Search Premeir. Web. 25 June 2010.
The H. W. Wilson Company. "Gosling, James." Leaders of the Information Age (2004). Biorgraphy Reference Bank Select Edition. Web.
Lyons, Daniel. "Java in jeopardy." Forbes 163.1 (1999): 110-111. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 19 June 2010.
"Mr Ellison helps himself." Economist 390.8628 (2009): 65-66. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 19 June 2010.
Niemeyer, Patrick, and Jonathan Knudsen. Learning Java. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly, 2005. Print.
Ricadela, Aaron. "Sun Mulls Deeper Open-Source Dive." BusinessWeek Online (2007): 1. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 19 June 2010.
Schalk, Chris. "A Java Developer's Guide to Google Technologies - Google Code Help." Google Code. May 2007. Web. 20 July 2010. .
Tennant, Don. "Q&A: McNealy Defends Sun Reliability, Personal Privacy Views - Computerworld." Computerworld - IT News, Features, Blogs, Tech Reviews, Career Advice. Web. 9 July 2010. .
"The future of Java." eWeek 25.33 (2008): 27-30. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 19 June 2010
US Department of Justice. "Videotaped Deposition Excerpts of Bill Gates." Welcome to the United States Department of Justice. Web. 2 July 2010. .

All,

Take a look at this article published today by Jim Cramer.  Although he's a democrat and was a supporter of Obama in the beginning, he has reversed course over the last year after viewing the destructive attitudes of the democrats (and some republicans who have gone along with them) in power.  Then read my comments after the article:

Cramer: Obamacare Will Topple the Market

Either the market doesn't care that the health care bill will pass -- and it will -- or it doesn't think that the proposal will cost that much -- something I think is nuts. Which brings us to a very tenuous crossroad: We have to wonder if this is one of those occasions, like in 2008, where the market doesn't see the coming catastrophe. Or perhaps the market sees any resolution as positive.

>>Here's Your Portfolio If Obama's Agenda Wins

I don't. I think when the health care bill passes -- and it will pass, I believe, because Nancy Pelosi has worked diligently behind the scenes to bend the anti-abortion foes, the key votes, to her will -- the president will get a second wind. That means the whole agenda -- cap-and-trade, Card Check for easier organizing (something that Wal-Mart's (WMT) inability to move even on its dividend boost tells you is coming) and amnesty for immigrants who are currently not citizens -- will quickly come to pass, perhaps even before the election. To pay for these items I see a dramatic increase in ordinary tax rates and perhaps capital gains and dividend tax rates in 2011 either reaching or exceeding those ordinary income rates as this current version of the Democratic Party believes that only rich people own stocks. (That's been a hallmark from Day 1 with this administration.)

Given those hurdles, which include a suicide pact with financial health for small businesses that obviously can't afford health care without risking the capital formation necessary, I think you have to put the double-dip recession back on the table.

Those who have read me here and watch "Mad Money" know that I was out there early thinking that 2010 would not produce a double-dip, despite ample commentary that it would. But if health care reform passes, I am going to revise my thinking -- and you know I think it will -- especially because immigrant amnesty will cause the health care system to be overloaded and our taxes to soar.

The stakes seem so high while the market appears so complacent, perhaps because none of the levies will pass until 2011. To me that's around the corner. It's been slightly more than a year that I have been bullish. That's hanging by a thread this week.

Obamacare cuts that thread. Even if the market doesn't seem to know it.

At the time of publication, Cramer had no positions in the stocks mentioned.

I have had this sentiment for a while, and back in January began scaling down positions, moving to cash.  I will continue to do so ahead of this vote, especially with the Dow now sitting at 10,700.  This seems like a good level to take some money of the table and wait to see what congress decides to do.

My dad recently asked me what direction the market might be going, and to be honest, I don't know any big professionals that I read who have much to say on it right now either.  That being said, while it is hard to get any direction in most sectors of the economy as we await the decision in DC, I think one sector that will do well regardless of what happens is the energy sector.  So if you still want to have some money in play, I would think investing in mutual funds, ETFs, or stocks in the energy sector might be a good idea.  In my view, if Obama wins and gets health care, he'll probably get Cap and Trade, which will make energy stocks go up.  If he loses, energy should still go up because the economy should improve. 

And anyway, Energy stocks, especially those with direct holdings in the commodity, gain value the longer the Fed keeps the interest rate depressed.  As well, OPEC is not backing down on supply restraints, so oil should hold up and increase in price as demand continues to increase, and production continues to fall.  One big player in the price right now is the drilling failure rate which is up dramatically over the last year.  That makes oil more expensive to produce, making the future price go up, meaning if you hold a share in the actual fields producing oil the value of that oil in the field increases.

My favorite energy stocks right now are Royalty Trusts and Master Limited Partnerships, or basically anything with either direct holdings in oil or gas reserves or companies that own the pipelines for distributing it.  Royalty Trusts and MLPs also pay very nice returns that have tax benefits, so their values hold up better even if the market moves against you.  Right now some RTs are distributing about 1% per month (12% annually) which is a great return.

Mutual funds and ETFs in this sector are also a good idea, just be sure they have exposure to natural gas and good oil companies like Devon Energy, Enbridge, and MLPs and RTs as part of their overall holdings.

Good luck out there.  And don't wait for Obama to mess things up market wise.  Right now the markets are showing no true direction and that is always a good time for some profit taking regardless of your overall market sentiment.  But as I said, a lot of the pros are becoming worried there might be a pullback, or worse, a double dip recession.  And cash is always nice to have to buy the dip when it happens.

Tijs Limburg


Blogs:
http://phystrings.blogspot.com/
http://getoutofthedark.blogspot.com/

Ben Bernanke Named Time Magazine Person of The Year

Ben Bernanke has been named as the Time Magazine person of the year.  And I have to agree wholeheartedly with this nomination!  After reading the article, I found once again that I am much in line with the way he thinks about economic policy and disaster mitigation in the wake of the biggest economic crisis in 75 years.  He was the man for the moment.

 

Here is the article: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1946375_1947251_1947520-1,00.html

 

While I take issue with much of Keynesian economic policy, which is where my persuasions differ from those of Bernanke’s, I have long considered the actions of the Fed over the past year as absolutely necessary, though troubling and unprecedented.  I had always been taught that the biggest factor in the Great Depression was inaction and massive blunders by the Federal Reserve. 

 

Recently, there has been a lot of Fed bashing, and craziness, even from pundits like Glenn Beck, all slandering the Fed as some kind of money-printing-inflation-happy-mind-trust.  But let’s remember how absolutely reluctant Bernanke’s Fed was to take action in the first place.  It doesn’t seem like the about-face actions of the recent Fed could all be part of some planned conspiracy to doom the economy or be some sort of power-grab for the greedy like Ron Paul would have us all believe.  Wall Street enthusiasts like Jim Cramer were crying foul and screaming at the top of their lungs that Bernanke’s inflation worries and tentative, hands-off policies were causing massive problems before the bog meltdown in 2008.  Bernanke stood by, almost to his own undoing and disaster, because he obviously believes more in hands-off policy than that of Keynesian ways.  But when it was inevitable that action be taken, he took it and dramatically changed the landscape of the financial world.

 

Since the disaster started in 2008, I have thought of the collapse and ensuing ‘bailouts’ as being similar to a fire.  Why do cities and communities pay for a fire brigade using tax revenue?  Why isn’t it corporations, such as insurance firms, that use their revenues to fund the fire brigade as part of your insurance policy?  I’ve come to a plain conclusion that city governments know what their assets are: property.  That is a large source of their revenues.  They can tax the properties, they can tax the businesses that operate on those properties, they can tax things that are stored on those properties, and they can tax the individuals that live in those properties. Indeed, it is property that is the most important asset to a city’s revenue stream. 

 

Recall the great fire disaster of the Chicago Fire of 1871.  34 city blocks, or more than 2,000 acres encompassing some 17,500 buildings and $222 million in property – one third of the city’s valuation, were destroyed by a fire that started in a small wood shed on a small alley in the city.  The city made fatal errors in not responding soon enough, and lost a substantial amount of its assets, and the ensuing revenue streams.

 

Where are most of our assets as Americans?  Housed in financial institutions.  Securities, bonds, cash reserve, mortgages and titles, insurance policies, loans, etc., are all housed in these firms.  Why, when one of them catches fire financially, would we not use taxpayer funds to send the fire brigade and put out the financial fire just like we do with real fires?  Would we really want to cling to a wait-and-see policy and allow ’34 blocks’ of financial institutions that hold our hard earned assets to burn to the ground?  Interestingly, that number above, the one third of Chicago’s value, is similar to the number of banks that were allowed to fail in the Great Depression – one third.

 

While it is still early, and hard to tell where the crisis will end, everyone on this email list still has a job, and has not had to endure bread lines and bank runs to the extent that they were endured in the 30s.  As 2009 comes to a close, a year who’s beginning was laden with fear, I for one am very grateful for that fact.  And I can’t help but think that Bernanke’s academic preparation and professional action had a lot to do with it.

 

TIJS LIMBURG
tijs.limburg@3-form.com
Associate Software Developer
3-FORM.COM
2300 South 2300 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
T	801.994.8045
F	801.649.2699
C	801.680.6369
3form Technical Support 877.649.2670

Health Care Rights

In response to this Forbes article, I sent the following to Senator Hatch and will also send a similar letter to each of my other representatives, and hope you will do the same.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/insurance/article/107408/5-freedoms-you-would-lose-in-health-care-reform.html?mod=insurance-health

 

 

To The Honorable Senator Orrin Hatch,

 

Firstly, thank you for taking time to read this letter.  I believe it to be one of the most important aspects of the American life to be able to be represented and give our trust to those we elect to make the proper decisions in our behalf.  However, at times I believe it is also important that the representatives ensure that when their constituents cry out loudly for or against something, even if they believe differently, that they vote in a way to represent the majority of their constituents.

 

Senator, you have served our great State respectively, and I am proud of the freedoms we enjoy in Utah.  As a 25 year old working class citizen who is also attending schooling at the University of Utah and working a full time job as a software developer, I am very concerned about the health care issue.

I strongly believe and advocate that health care issues such as those being debated in Washington should really be left up to the individual States to be decided, and should not be mandated federally.  If a State decides that they want a Universal Health Care program, such as Massachusetts did, they should be able to decide within their State whether that is right for their population.  But other States should have the option of electing to keep things as they are if they like.  No one population is the same, and trying to govern in such ways when it comes to health care I believe is highly inefficient, and will prove to be dysfunctional.  As always, the larger populations will win out against the smaller ones, and we will be forced to follow policies which for example may be necessary for larger, highly urbanized populations, but are not necessary for us.

 

And as you know, the Senate was instituted for that reason.  To protect the interests of the smaller States and give them an equal voice to the larger States in a governing entity. 

 

Utahns are self-reliant.  We understand the need for employment, good health care, participating in the system of government, and being good citizens.  We have different healthcare needs than Californians, New Yorkers, and others.  We should be able to set our own policies within our State on how we want Health Care to operate.  For instance, we have a higher rate of birth here, and a younger population.  Therefore our Health Care policies should be reflective of that and our Insurers should be able to work their policies around those facts.  I fear that a nationalized, or Universal and federally mandated system like the one being proposed at the least would be either too general or too specific in how it goes about making laws regarding even just those two aspects of the Health Care system for Utah.

 

Please vote against  the health care plans being proposed in Congress, and tell them, as well as the President, that this is a State issue and that this debate should be sent to the 50 State legislatures to decide upon for their own populations.

 

Respectfully,

 

Tijs G. Limburg

 

 

 

TIJS LIMBURG
tijs.limburg@3-form.com
Associate Software Developer
3-FORM.COM
2300 South 2300 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
T	801.994.8045
F	801.649.2699
C	801.680.6369
3form Technical Support 877.649.2670