An Albert Einstein Funny…

There’s a story about how Dr. Albert Einstein was traveling to Universities in his car, delivering lectures on his theory of relativity.

During one journey, his driver remarked “Dr. Einstein, I have heard you deliver that lecture about 30 times. I know it by heart and bet I could give it myself.”

“Well, I’ll give you the chance”, said the good Doctor.  “They don’t know me at the next University, so when we get there, I’ll put on your cap, and you introduce yourself as Dr. Einstein and give the lecture.”

The driver delivered Einstein’s lecture without a single mistake. When he finished, he started to leave, but one of the professors stopped him and asked a complex question filled with mathematical equations and formulas. The driver thought fast. “The answer to that problem is so simple,” he said.

“I’m surprised you have to ask me that! In fact, to show you just how elementary it is, I’m going to ask my DRIVER to come up here and answer that question!”

Zardari leaves Pakistan with a legacy…

English: Asif Ali Zardari.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari.

In the last week, Pakistan has held it’s Presidential elections in which PML (N) nominee Mamnoon Hussain won in a landslide 432 to 77 against Pakistan Movement for Justice party nominee Wajihuddin Ahmed.

Why is the election of Hussain such a big deal?  Political handoffs take place all the time.

This is the first, in Pakistani history, that a democratic change, by the will of the people has come.  For Pakistan, a nation nearly a century old, this is it’s first true democratically willed exchange of power.

Pakistan itself was conceived in 1930 by a proclamation by British Indian politician Sir Muhammad Iqbal, the nation itself formed in 1940 as a sovereign state for Muslims that was originally part of British-controlled India.  Since then, it has been fraught with political problems and disaster that left many wondering if Pakistan would ever become democratically governed.

Pakistan received official independence on 14 August, 1947 from British India, becoming a British controlled dominion under control of King George V of the United Kingdom, under the title of “Emperor of India.”  He later renounced this role and styled himself as the “King of Pakistan,” a title passed to his daughter, the incumbent Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, who styled herself as the Queen of Pakistan.

In 1956, a revolution created and installed an Islamic Parliamentary Republic, which was supposed to be civilian run, but in the process, a military coup took over the revolution and installed the army’s commander-in-chief, Ayub Khan, as the ruler of Pakistan.

Pervez Musharraf

Former Chief Executive and President General Pervez Musharraf

In 1970, free elections were held, heralded as a transition from a military junta to a democratically elected civilian government, but the sitting military government refused to hand power to the elected successor.  Internal fighting in the nation sparked an independence movement which led to a secession of east Pakistan into the nation now known as Bangladesh.

Power was handed to a civilian government which didn’t last long, and Pakistan soon found itself under martial law again with the coup led by army General Zia-ul-Haq.  Zia, who died in a plane crash 1988, was succeeded by Pakistan’s first female Prime MInister, Benazir Bhutto, followed by Nawaz Sharif after a scandal which cost her her seat.  During Sharif’s time in office, Pakistan’s military nuclear weapons testing led to destabilization and the Kargill War of 1999, in which point Army Chief of Staff General Pervez Musharraf assumed power in a bloodless coup.

Ruling as both civilian and military leader of Pakistan, he executed his duties often under one title, as a civilian or commander in chief independently, theoretically, while being the same person.  He resigned from his Army post amid massive protests for elections, but continued on as President of Pakistan until the return of Benazir Bhutto in 2007, returning from a self-imposed exile to see that Musharraf’s dictatorship was unseated.  Assassinated in the twilight hours of 2007, Musharraf heeded calls for an election, which saw him replaced with Bhutto’s husband, Asif Ali Zardari.

President Zardari took the helm of Pakistan during some of it’s most trying times –and became a friend of the United States in the war on terror, which was extremely unpopular amongst voters in Pakistan, particularly since the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden, which took place in an initially secret strike in Abottabad.

Which leads to today.  For the first time in it’s history, a democratically elected government of Pakistan is set to hand authority and power over to a new democratically elected government.  This is history in the making, particularly for a newer, nuclear-powered nation.  What can the future hold for a stable, and flourishing Pakistan?

Detroit Skyline. Courtesy of Mike Boening www.memoriesbymike.zenfolio.com

Detroit Bankruptcy… Why is this such a big deal? I will tell you…

Yesterday, at 4:07PM, on approval from Governor Rick Snyder, Detroit Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr ordered the City of Detroit to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection under Title XI of the USC.  Sure.  Other cities have done this before — and people and businesses do it every day, but what’s the big deal?

The big deal is simple: Detroit is the largest municipality in history to declare itself insolvent.  This not only is going to be a major rule-writing moment in American legal history, but also has the potential to do as much harm as it does good over the long term.

The long term positives are fairly simple: Detroit, if successful, will be relieved of most of it’s obligations, and many of the others will be repaid at drastically reduced amounts, as ordered by a federal bankruptcy judge.  This will allow Detroit to begin paying its bills — without borrowing to do so, as it has for the past decade.  This is a good thing.

Detroit Mayor Dave Bing, Detroit Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder

Detroit Mayor Dave Bing, Detroit Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder

The bad news is what gets cut.  The Emergency Manager of Detroit made it clear that his priorities were people first, then creditors — meaning he wanted to protect pay, pensions and benefits for workers and retirees of the City of Detroit as much as he could.  He made this abundantly clear; but stated it was not off the table.  Creditors and contractors would be the next priority.  Creditors didn’t take kindly to this, and indeed, made THAT also clear.

Before all this can happen though, the filing sets in motion several things: the first is immediate relief from creditors.  As of the moment the bankruptcy was filed, for the moment, creditors lost all rights to any money for the time being.  This can, if the Judge allows, give Detroit enough relief to pay what’s necessary to keep it running: it’s employees, contractors and even things like the light bills.  What’s next, and likely beginning to happen today, is the investigation by the court of wether or not Detroit CAN qualify for a Title XI bankruptcy.  Just because one files doesn’t mean one qualifies.  This sets into motion a massive audit of EVERY creditor of every DOLLAR owed BY the City — likely including employees as well.  Next, creditors to the city have a right to appeal, and will likely use the excuse that the City/Emergency Manager negotiated in bad faith, just to hold the process up — as it’s their legal right to do so.  Assuming the City is found to be eligible, the Judge then decides what gets the axe, what gets paid, and who gets paid in what amounts; as likely, those who do get paid (speaking in the terms of creditors and contracts) will likely get paid only a portion, if not a FRACTION, of what they’re owed.

Because this move essentially lays waste to Detroit’s already junk-level bond and credit, the move also will not at all inspire confidence in businesses in Detroit, particularly those who DO business with Detroit.  My major fear is large employers will wind up packing up, and saying “So long, Detroit — it was a nice ride, we wish you the best of luck.”  Not only is this further revenue from taxes and spending lost, just one or two larges businesses to do so could inspire other businesses OR people to flee as well.  A CLEAR vote of no-confidence by the business sector if it were to happen.

Make no mistake, we’re witnessing history — the municipal equivalent of Lehman Brothers is happening as we  speak; which will write books and rules on how to accomplish such a bankruptcy in the future.

I see a Title XI as a mixed blessing for Detroit.  The good — DEFINITELY comes with the bad here.

“We have a great city, but a city going down hill for the last 60 years,” he said at an evening press conference. He said 38% of the city’s budget is being spent on “legacy costs,” such as pensions and debt service. He said police take almost an hour to respond to calls, compared to a national average of 11 minutes, and that 40% of street lights in the city are turned off.  That’s unacceptable,”
    — Kevyn Orr
    Emergency Manager, City of Detroit

Detroit city skyline shot courtesy of Mike Boening
www.memoriesbymike.zenfolio.com

Iowa Supreme Court rules on Melissa Nelson

quote-open

Eva Evangelina (Courtesy of Brazzers.com)

Eva Evangelina
(Courtesy of Brazzers.com)

“Without proof of sex discrimination, the employment-at-will doctrine followed in Iowa guides the outcome.”
Iowa Supreme Court Ruling, 12 July 2013

The problem I see here is, this sets a dangerous precedent.

Miss Nelson alleges that she was fired because her employer found her “irresistible,” and indeed, her presence during his on-again-off-again sexual relationship with his wife was like “…like having a Lamborghini in the garage and never driving it.”  The employer doesn’t deny he said this, if I remember correctly.

Okay, a fair statement, perhaps.  Perhaps during the downturn of his sexual relationship with his wife, he found himself enamored with his assistant.  This has the makings of a very unfortunate situation.  A marriage hangs in the balance on one side, and Nelson’s employment on the other.  Unfortunately for Nelson, the marriage argument won out, and the employer, under the at-will employment laws in Iowa, terminated her employment — for that exact reason.  She is “irresistible.”

Most At-will laws say that employment can be terminated at any time, by either party, for any reason that doesn’t violate other laws, such as the Civil Rights Act, or anything that’s essentially NOT a BFOQ.  This is common knowledge.  You can be terminated for showing up to work late, even once.  You can be fired for misfiling an important document, even once.  While not “good” reasons, they are reasons under the law.

However, my concern here is the precedent it sets.  While this reason may be “legal,” is it 1) ethical; and 2) safe from precedent?

Because now that the Iowa Supreme Court does not count this at-will termination as a form of sex discrimination, does this set the scene for even more extreme terminations for similar reasons?

Let’s not forget: The court has UPHELD the employer’s right to fire because of his “irresistible” attraction to her, likely physically; as there are mentions of his requiring her to wear lab coats, and her other physical attributes.  Does this now, mean that someone, such as I am now allowed to terminate someone like ME, under the rules of something along the lines of…

quote-open“You are being terminated because I found the size and shape of your breasts to not be large enough.  Because you are a front-office worker of a successful company, I require front-line employees to be dressed and appear impeccable, including your physical attributes, such as breast size, shape, appearance, acceptable amounts of cleavage showing, etc.”

Basically, it means I’m allowed to fire her because her tits aren’t big enough — and she’s not wearing tops or suits that expose them “properly.”  While this may sound ridiculous, is it *REALLY* something that could be unprecedented, if this ruling is upheld in the high court as part of an “at-will” termination?

“Intellectual Disarmament”

James Albaugh is president and chief executive...

James Albaugh, President & CEO of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems.(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

…a phrase coined by Boeing’s James Albaugh, should be a major concern for intellectuals, academics and theorists in the world, in my opinion.

The United States academic system, particularly the University-level education system, is among the best and brightest in the world.  Armed with more Ph.D.’s, Ed.D.‘s, J.D.’s, MBAs and MS’s than in some COUNTRIES, the University system in America is unique — and perhaps, even special.  But we’ve got major flaws that, if not addressed, could wind up becoming our undoing.

Right now, the US has one very special “weapon” in its arsenal.  And that’s the F-1 visa.  Our great nation allows students from other countries to come to our nation, study and achieve a quality education, and then return to their nation and, with any luck, achieve great things.  Not only does our economy benefit from this arrangement, by receiving the tuition and fees from the visiting student, but it would stand to reason the student also eats, buys music or engages in some other forms of recreation — even to a small degree.  All of these things come together to form a fairly beneficial process to both parties.

However, the problem therein lies that that’s exactly what happens.  Often, they don’t have an incentive to stay in the USA.  They receive their American education, and return home.  An education subsidized by American taxpayers.  Now, is there anything “wrong” with this… not “as such,” of course not.  America, in my opinion, has the duty and obligation to the world to be a place where those who want to raise themselves up in the world can come and do so.

But what incentive are we giving those hard working students to STAY in America?  Often, as soon as their Visa runs out, they HAVE to go home.  Other nations recall their students as soon as they finish their course of study.  Why aren’t we, as a nation, saying “Look, we’ve given you the tools to succeed… why not stay HERE, and let us help you succeed anymore?”

Albaugh put it very well: Other nations, be it the nation the student hails from, or others, see graduating students and are actively attracting them.  Why aren’t we, as a nation, offering foreign students and other intellectuals/academics an “easy in” to America, particularly after they’ve spent several years here already?  Will America continue to stay innovative if such  trends continue?

Between government cuts (particularly in Defense) and the hemorrhaging of talented minds that are educated here and otherwise leave — what could this hail in the future?