Via the BBC: Czechs go to the polls in a general election.
![]() ![]() |
Information | |
ARCHIVES
April 2012
January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 |
By Steven L. Taylor
Via the BBC: Czechs go to the polls in a general election. By Steven L. Taylor
Note: originally written for OTB. James Joyner’s post on President Obama’s move to send National Guard troops to the US-Mexican border is pretty much spot-on in regards to its criticisms of the policy move. He specifically notes:
Further, it should noted that the two problems are different. Yes, there are some smugglers who traffic both in people and drugs, and yes, they are crossing the same border, but ultimately the situations are different ones that have to be dealt with as distinct policy realms, even if they have overlap. In simple terms, the solutions for the drug trafficking problem are not the same as the solutions for illegal immigrant problem and we need to understand that fact. Simplistic cries of “seal of the border” do not amount to actual policy solutions. There is one way in which both drugs and migrant labor are linked: both are driven by supply and demand. Writing on the topic of illegal immigration, Patrick Corcoran rightly observes:
It is both that simple and that complex. He further notes:
I am sure some readers will greatly dispute this fact, but it is nonetheless true. As problematic as the entire process is, it is clear that the maids, gardeners, fast food workers, fruit pickers, construction workers and the like are serving a purpose in our economy. Further, despite popular perception in some quarters, they do pay taxes: sales taxes, property taxes via rent, excise taxes, and frequently payroll taxes. In regards to said payroll taxes, the irony is that any social security taxes paid by undocumented workers goes to subsidize social security (because the workers in question are using SS numbers not their own and they cannot collect on the system). As the NYT reported back in 2005: Illegal Immigrants Are Bolstering Social Security With Billions:
None of this is to argue that there is no cost to illegal immigrants or that they represent an unvarnished good. However, the situation is far, far more complex than many who get really upset about the situation make it out to be (where it is often painted all all cost and no benefit). Certainly it should be clear that illegal immigrations is far from only a problem. Again, the labor demand is there and I have long maintained (for example) the forces of supply and demand are quite powerful and more difficult to contain than many proponents of border control wish to acknowledge. Indeed, the clear existence of this labor market is a solid argument for comprehensive immigration reform that would include making it far easier for this market to work. Back to Corocan:
It would be nice if we could get a more realistic discussion on this topic. Also, it should be noted that roughly 40% of illegal immigrants in the US are not border crossers, but rather visa over-stayers. As such, even if we could totally seal the border between the US and Mexico with a force shield of Trekian proportions, we still wouldn’t have solved the problem. One of the political observations I would make is that the segment of US politics that is most vehement on the question of border control is also the segment that is most interested (at least rhetorically) in both promoting capitalism and smaller government. However, on this topic that appear to wish to repeal the laws of supply and demand and to increase the power of the government. By Steven L. Taylor
Via the BBC: Jamaica clashes claimed more than 70 lives, “Most of the dead were young men, some suspected of being armed, while at least three police and soldiers also died, officials said.” Additionally, over 500 have been arrested. Meanwhile, regarding the object of the assault: “It is not clear if Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke, who is wanted by the US, is still in Jamaica.” The attempt to capture Coke and extradite him to the United States lasted four days to date. It is unclear exactly what sparked the move to extradite Coke at this precise moment in time:
This is all classic drug war developments. First we have an individual made fabulously wealthy via the drug trade. Second, said individual uses said wealth to ingratiate himself with large swaths of the poor, to corrupt segments of the government, and to arm himself to the teeth. Third, all of this makes the drug lord in question into a force able to contest the state itself leading to the only way that he can be taken out is via substantial state action. The story is quick similar to that of Pablo Escobar, the first (and perhaps greatest) of the cocaine lords. It is certainly a pattern we are seeing in Mexico at the moment. By Steven L. Taylor
Note to Eric Johnston, primary candidate for the GOP nomination for Place 3 on the Alabama Supreme Court: getting a robo-call from you at 3:16am is not a good way to create good feelings about your candidacy. I was awakened this morning by the voice of Mr. Johnston coming over the answering machine by my bed (I had left the phone itself in the other room, so didn’t hear it ring). At first I thought it was my alarm and I wacked at it sleepily enough that I ended up screwing it up enough that it did not work properly this morning (I knocked it off the radio station so all I got was quiet static), so not only did Mr. Johnston wake me up, he contributed to me over-sleeping this morning. Since my attention has now been drawn to Mr. Johnston, I note that in his robo-call he notes that he is a “pro-life conservative” (I listened to it again this morning to figure out who the heck it was that had awakened me). Now, this is Alabama and being a “pro-life conservative” is a good thing in a GOP primary. While I have heard other judicial candidates make similar claims, they continue to rattle me a bit, as it is pretty close to campaigning for the court on a specific policy issue, which ought to be a no no. It is especially striking to me for conservative judicial candidates, because they frequently rail against judicial activists. Indeed, if one looks at Johnston’s web site, one finds:
So, in other words, it sounds like he wants to be a judicial activists of a conservative stripe. Indeed, it reminds me very much of the campaign that Tom Parker ran in 2004 (as I noted herehttp://poliblogger.com/?p=3710) (the incumbent that Johnston is seeking to replace). I must confess that the infusion of politics otherwise unconnected to being a judge in Alabama underscores that elected judges aren’t a very good idea—it does turn it into a ideological contest about policy rather than one about qualifications and judicial philosophy. Indeed, they often sound like they are running for a legislative body rather than a judicial position. By Steven L. Taylor
By Steven L. Taylor
By Steven L. Taylor
![]()
365.145 (5/25/10). And in the appropriate locale. Filed under: photoblogging | Comments Off|
By Steven L. Taylor
A while back I noted the case of Angie Sanclemente Valencia, a Colombian model who was wanted on suspicion of running a drug smuggling ring using model (She Has it All: Looks and a Cocaine Cartel). She is now in custody. Via the BBC: Colombian beauty queen arrested on drug charges:
By Steven L. Taylor
The Latin American Herald Tribune reports: Colombian Military Chief Resigns.
The resignation is effective August 7th, which is Uribe’s last day in office. Padilla otherwise would have held the position until December 31st. Exactly what the political implications of the timing of this resignation is unclear. It is interesting that it links Paddy’s tour of duty strictly to Uribe. As the story noted, Padilla is linked heavily to both Uribe’s successes (such as the rescue of Ingrid Betancourt) and his failings (like the false positives scandal), which is also the case with Santos. No doubt having Padilla in the news emphasizes both the positive and negative about Uribe, and therefore about Santos. By Steven L. Taylor
If the man actually wins the presidency of Colombia will that mean the end of every story about him mentioning that he once mooned an auditorium full of students when he was rector of the National University? One can but hope. The latest example is via the Miami Herald: Youngest voters may sway Colombian election. |
blog advertising is good for you Visitors Since 2/15/03
|
Powered by WordPress