I support SOPA

Although there are some semi-legitimate concerns about the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), my personal feeling is that SOPA is a good step in the right direction for protecting intellectual property in this age of the Internet and World Wide Web. A fair amount of the more virulent opposition to SOPA comes from the anti-globalism, anti-capitalism crowd, as epitomized by the Occupy movement (notably its Occupy Wall Street (OWS) subsidiary), and is based primarily on opposition to the very concept of intellectual property (IP). I simply don't support their efforts, on the whole, even if on occasion they do make a few good points. If they want to reform and refine the system, great, fine, have at it, but they seem obsessed with demonizing the system and committed to either subvert it if not completely overturn it.

 

The legitimate concern is that sometimes well-meaning people or businesses (or non-profits or even governmental institutions) will make mistakes and inadvertently infringe on somebody's alleged intellectual property rights and then have hell to pay for it. I'm sure that we will stumble onto occasional horror stories where best intentions go awry, but overall I really do think that most well-meaning people and firms will do the right things and things will work out. Just because the system may fail on occasion is not a reasonable argument against the system overall.

 

It appears to me that most of the opposition to SOPA by Internet service vendors is simply that enforcement of SOPA will be an added cost and a pain for them. I accept that SOPA may in fact increase their expenses, but nobody has provided any evidence that such costs would likely be prohibitive or even anything other than merely incidental. Intellectual property is a fact of life and any Internet service vendor should by now have a budget for assuring that they and their users do not maliciously or inadvertently fail to respect intellectual property rights. It is not that they don't believe in IP, but that IP is an inconvenient distraction.

 

As far as the argument that SOPA will result in censorship, I find that argument completely empty and without merit. The concept of censorship is based on the actual content of the message, not the form of the message. I think the issue here is that some people want to illegally re-use or re-purpose the content of others and consider efforts to thwart that desire as censorship, which is a completely nonsensical argument. Parody and fair use are still legal, so the censorship claim is empty. The censorship claim simply amounts to yet another smokescreen which is an appeal to emotion to cover up for the underlying disbelief in the very concept of intellectual property.

 

And if there are bugs in the legislation, I'm sure we will quickly find out and they can be fixed. But I simply do not buy the argument that since the legislation might have speculative negative side effects that it should not be enacted at all.

 

So, let people provide their input, Congress can then adjust the legislation as they, as representatives of the people, see fit, President Obama can sign it, and we can all move forward.

 

But this idea of the critics that SOPA will kill or cripple the Internet is just complete nonsense that is simply a smokescreen to cover for their true, anti-intellectual capital, anti-business, anti-capitalism intentions.

-- Jack Krupansky

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 1/26/2012: Can we assign meanings to one's life?

(Please note the new time: 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM!!)

 

Café Philo New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, January 26, 2012 to discuss the topic "Can we assign meanings to one's life?".

 

If you do wish to attend, please sign up on the Meetup page.

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 6 attendees):

1. Can we assign meanings to one's life? (4) *
2. Does determinism entail predestination? (1)
3. Would dueling be amenable in a democratic society? (2)
4. How has photography changed the world? (3)
5. What is a system? (3)
6. Should we have referendums in a democratic society? (2)
7. Why is financial inequality so unpopular? (3)
8. Is democracy an illusion? (3)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City next week, Thursday, 1/12/2012: Can we have meaning without words?

(Please note the new time: 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM!!)

 

Café Philo New York City will meet next week, on Thursday, January 12, 2012 to discuss the topic "Can we have meaning without words?" I suggested the topic.

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 6 attendees):

1. Do we need religion? (4)
2. Occupy Wall Street. (3)
3. Is our government democratic enough? (2)
4. Why are there holiday lights? (3)
5. Why do words have meanings? (3)
6. Can we have meaning without words? (5) *
7. How can jargon damage intellectual pursuit? (4)
8. What is important in life? (2)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

The future for solar power

I certainly believe that there is a very bright future for solar power, but there is also no question that the sector was heavily over-hyped in the past decade. Now as a lot of the hype has gotten burned off over the past year, maybe we can get back to the real business of focusing on real demand and real economics. I enjoyed reading the summary of the plight of the solar power sector in The Wall Street Journal by Yuliya Chernova entitled "Dark Times Fall on Solar Sector", but the article left the issue hanging.

 

My personal view is that economics matter tremendously and we need to walk a fine line between government promotion via subsidy and simply standing back and letting markets work their magic. Maybe we are finally at the stage where government subsidies are hitting diminishing returns and we should focus more attention on focusing solar power on applications where raw cost is not the primary issue. For example, a lot of consumers really would prefer to pay a little more for "clean" energy that helps to fight Global Warming and Climate Change. There are also plenty of remote government facilities which would benefit from being less reliant on supplies of fossil fuels.

 

A lot of the debt taken on by fledgling solar power companies was clearly misguided and we will certainly see a dramatic shakeout of the industry, but that is a very good thing and is quite typical of emergent industries.

 

At some point the Chinese government subsidies for the solar power sector will peak and the sharp decline in component costs will become more moderate, at which point I am sure there will be plenty of U.S. private equity capital available to roll up the remaining viable domestic solar manufacturers at fire-sale prices into a more profitable structure and then move forward.

 

Exactly what the structure of the solar power sector will look like five or ten years from now is anybody's guess, but at least that longer-term future is very bright indeed, even if well beyond the limited and shortsighted vision of the WSJ.

 

And meanwhile we should be profusely thanking the Chinese government for helping to push solar power to be a much more economic option for the production of electricity.

-- Jack Krupansky

Cafe Philo in New York City in three weeks, Thursday, 1/12/2012: Can we have meaning without words?

(Please note the new time: 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM!!)

 

Due to the holidays, the next Café Philo which was scheduled for December 29th is cancelled, so the next Café Philo New York City will meet in three weeks, on Thursday, January 12, 2012. And since we lacked a quorum last week, we decided to hold over the discussion topic to the next meeting. The topic is "Can we have meaning without words?" I suggested the topic.

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 6 attendees):

1. Do we need religion? (4)
2. Occupy Wall Street. (3)
3. Is our government democratic enough? (2)
4. Why are there holiday lights? (3)
5. Why do words have meanings? (3)
6. Can we have meaning without words? (5) *
7. How can jargon damage intellectual pursuit? (4)
8. What is important in life? (2)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Freak elevator accident

I live in an old New York City apartment building with a predictably cranky old elevator, so I carefully read any news item about elevators. The news this morning was scary indeed, with a woman actually dying in a freak elevator accident not that far from my apartment building. They had the address in the article and it sounded very near a building I had once visited years ago.

 

During my daily walk around midtown Manhattan I detoured slightly (two blocks) to walk on Madison Avenue past 41st and 40th streets, where I could see lots of emergency and media vehicles. I watched and talked to a few people for a few minutes, and saw a stretcher being wheeled into the building, around roughly 2:30 PM, which was like four and a half hours after the incident. That suggests that it took quite some time for the fire department (or whoever) to actually remove her body from the elevator/shaft. Must have been gruesome.

 

I read that the building was built in 1926 – same year as my apartment building. We have multiple "outages" of our elevator every year. I usually walk down the stairs from my top/10th floor apartment when leaving the building; I used to try to walk up the stairs a fair amount; maybe I'll do so more frequently now.

 

When our elevator is out they let us ride in the old freight elevator which is the really old manual style of elevator where the "elevator operator" moves this lever back and forth to manually start and stop the elevator with this scissor-fold door that moves back and forth. Hey, at least then the operator has some options if something goes wrong and can stop the elevator immediately. That's the downside of these fully-automatic modern "contraptions."

 

I have no idea whether the elevator in that build was an older-older model or had been updated to some more state of the art configuration. I suspect the latter since there are a number of sophisticated tenants in that building. Assuming the latter... hmmm... I wonder... was the elevator "malfunction" a hardware failure or (God forbid) a software bug? Or, maybe a discrepancy between the "spec" that the software was written to and how the hardware actually behaves. Or, maybe, there are one or more possible "user errors" that should obviously be treated much more benignly but for whatever reasons was not "handled" properly. My current suspicion is that the "Is door closed?" sensor malfunctioned, indicating that the door was closed fully when clearly it was not, and the elevator was permitted to move even though the door was clearly not closed.

-- Jack Krupansky

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 12/15: Can we have meaning without words?

(Please note the new time: 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM!!)

 

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, December 15, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "Can we have meaning without words?" I suggested the topic.

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 6 attendees):

1. Do we need religion? (4)
2. Occupy Wall Street. (3)
3. Is our government democratic enough? (2)
4. Why are there holiday lights? (3)
5. Why do words have meanings? (3)
6. Can we have meaning without words? (5) *
7. How can jargon damage intellectual pursuit? (4)
8. What is important in life? (2)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Made my 23rd payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government

I just made my 23rd monthly payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government. It wasn't a large payment, just another $25, but it is a matter of principle, albeit mostly symbolic. It may take me another 51 billion years to pay it all down all by myself at this rate (and assuming the deficit went to zero immediately), but, as I said, it is a matter of principle and a sense of personal responsibility. It is our debt, not somebody else's.

 

According to the U.S. Treasury web site, the total public debt outstanding was $15,051,673,595,197.90, as of November 28, 2011, an increase of about $111 billion over 39 days or $2.9 billion a day. This is an annualized run rate of $1.042 trillion, our effective annual deficit at this point.

 

Here is what I wrote back in January 2010 when I made my first donation/gift/contribution/payment:

Everybody is whining and complaining about the ballooning debt of the U.S. government, but who is actually doing anything about it? Well, for starters, ME! Yes, that's right, I, Jack Krupansky, just did something to reduce the U.S. government debt. Really. No kidding. I actually paid down a small slice of this debt. Granted, it was a rather small slice, but a slice nonetheless. Okay, sure, it was only $20, but the point is that at least I am one of the very few people willing to stand up and DO something about the problem, rather than be one of the whiners and complainers who refuse to acknowledge that it is their debt and their problem, not just the fault of mindless politicians in Washington, D.C. After all, every politician ultimately answers to voters and most of the so-called wasteful spending of the U.S. government is simply politicians responding to the demands of their constituents (voters.) Maybe my one small contribution to paying down the debt won't really make any difference to any of those whiners and complainers, but for me it is a matter of principle. I consciously choose action rather than the inaction and lack of responsibility of the whiners and complainers.

If you have any sense of principle, you too can pay down a slice of the U.S. government debt yourself at Pay.gov. You can pay via credit card or debit transfer from a bank account.

 

So do the right thing and show all those whiners and complainers (including so-called "tax protesters") how mindless and spineless they really are. PAY DOWN THE DEBT! And that has to start at the grass roots with us individuals before politicians will ever pick up the lead.

 

For the record, the only real way out of the deficit is not to merely cut expenditures or raise taxes or some combination of the two, but through economic growth, which includes a healthy amount of immigration in addition to unemployed workers going back to work and young people entering the work force. Sure, we need to manage the federal budget more carefully as well and make difficult choices about the size of government and tax rates, but the big focus has to be on achieving sustainable economic growth. In truth, nobody, including all of the Nobel laureate economists, knows what that sustainable rate really is or how to get there. We'll stumble our way in that general direction. That's the way we do things in America.

 

Another note: A significant part of the deficit is businesses writing off losses from the financial crisis and recession as tax deductions. That may continue for awhile longer, but will gradually wind down and tax receipts from businesses will begin to pick up in the coming years.

 

A final note: I may suspend my payment program next month since my current contract work ended six weeks ago. I do have the cash to continue my payment program, but technically, on principle, the loss of primary income is supposed to mean that a person should cut all inessential expenses until there has been a resumption of their primary income. In any case, my public debt payment program will continue in any month that I have enough primary income to pay my rent and basic living expenses. But, I don't expect that to be the case in December, and I expect to be living off savings for some number of months, so my U.S. public debt payment program is now effectively suspended until I line up new work.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 12/1: How long can Cafe Philo go on?

(Please note the new time: 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM!!)

 

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, December 1, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "How long can Cafe Philo go on?" It will be good to have a soul-searching discussion of what Café Philo is all about, what it hopes to achieve, and how it relates to the modern world, among other things. Bernard suggested the topic.

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 7 attendees):

1. Is Zuccotti Park a good thing? (2)
2. Does the fact that the sun will rise tomorrow assure that it will rise in the future? (3, 2)
3. Does determinism entail predestination? (2)
4. Why is it important to say what you mean? (3, 3)
5. How long can Cafe Philo go on? (3, 4) *
6. Would dueling be beneficial to society? (2)
7. Implications of overuse of the word "like." (2)
8. Can war be a good thing? (2)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

How can I become a millionaire?

There were actually a couple of short periods of time back in 2000 when I was technically a "millionaire", at least on paper (plus one time when a broker error made me a millionaire for a weekend!) But, as they say, "easy come, easy go." And back in 2005 I was doing so poorly financially that I actually filed for bankruptcy. Since November 30, 2005 (the day my bankruptcy was discharged) I have gradually been slowly climbing back up the lower rungs of the wealth ladder out of the pit of gloom, primarily through regular retirement contributions but also cutting spending and saving when possible, so that now I actually have a modest amount of "investments." I'm certainly not a millionaire or in the top 1% or even the top 10%, but I'm somewhere in the top 20% now. I won't disclose my exact "wealth", but it's very loosely north of $50,000 and south of $250,000, so lets pretend that it is $100,000 for the sake of argument and to have a nice round number. So, the question of the day is:

How can I become a millionaire?

Seriously. It's a legitimate question. How likely I am to become a millionaire again is an open and essentially unanswerable question, but what options or paths to that end are available is a reasonable question.

 

Here are the practical paths that I have identified in just a few minutes today:

1. Buy a winning lottery ticket. Hey, sometimes it actually does payoff, but I won't bet on it.
2. Marry a wealthy woman. Ditto.
3. Start a successful business. Ditto, except that it actually still is a (semi-remote) possibility.
4. Join a hot startup. Ditto, but a little more possible. (Seriously, send me leads on this!)
5. A short string of wildly-successful option trades. Hey, I actually did this in 1998 and 1999, but... a long story... and not likely to be repeated.
6. Invest in a hot stock that rises 40% a year for 7 years. Technically possible, but the odds remain long.
7. Investments that rise 20% a year for 13 years. More doable, but still quite difficult.
8. Investments that rise 15% a year for 17 years. On the fringe of being practical, but too long to wait.
9. Investments that rise 10% a year for 24 years. Starting to sound within reach technically, but not within reach time-wise.
10. Investments that rise 8% a year for 30 years. Great, something I might actually have a shot at achieving, but only if my goal is to leave a million in my will rather than enjoy it during retirement.
11. Investments that rise 5% a year for 48 years. Ditto. I could reasonably expect to do this, but again not for my personal use.
12. Investments that rise 4% a year for 59 years. That rate of return is reasonable and achievable for an average investor, but won't achieve the end goal within my expected lifetime.

And then there is inflation, taxes, bad years, etc. And presuming that you have a reasonable income stream while your wealth is growing.

 

And then there is a bigger pair of questions. Once you have accumulated $1 million:

1. How do you keep it?
2. How can you live off of it in a sustainable manner?

It may seem obvious that you save $1 million for retirement and then spend it all in retirement, but that is a risky expectation due to uncertainty about the future. Better to define an allocation of money that you will be spending and money that remains dedicated to further investment. That's a topic for future discussion. Here we're just concerned with getting to $1 million (ASAP) in the first place.

 

Where do I do from here? The only things I can say with certainty are that I will continue making my retirement contributions and hopefully see some compound returns over the years. I guess I can also safely say that unless I manage to achieve 20% annual returns I won't hit $1 million when I retire in 13 years. That is at least a good starting point for thinking about where I am, what I could achieve, and what my options are.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

All change is good

"Change" is a mantra thrown about by all activists, but only in a qualified form, such as "Change we can believe in." Well, change doesn't really work that way. Change is an inherent and fundamental force in the natural and manmade world. Accept change or be disappointed. We can't cherry-pick change, adopting the "good" change and rejecting the "bad" change. It's all or... well, it's all, period. My own personal view is that all change is inherently good. In fact, it is the very change that we find least appealing that typically has the most value for us, provided that we manage to effectively exploit that change and not fight it tooth and nail.

To state it simply:

All change is inherently good, especially that change which is least desired.

If it sometimes or even frequently seems that some particular change appears to have little positive value or an excessively negative value, it is most likely true that we have simply not tried hard enough to discover creative ways to exploit that change. Maybe we simply have blinders on or some outdated bias that interferes with our ability to see a path to a better future that exploits that change.

-- Jack Krupansky

Wall Street Occupied (by the Dark Knight)

On a typical Saturday I walk all around lower Manhattan (starting my walk from my apartment on East 50th Street), sometimes walking up Wall Street. Since 9/11 Wall Street has had limited access, but usually the sidewalks are open to pedestrian traffic and even the street itself is usually open to pedestrian traffic. Since the Occupy Wall Street movement moved into the neighborhood there have been the usual steel barricades to assure that people stay on the sidewalks. But, this past Saturday (11/5) I walked up Wall Street from the East River and around Water Street or Pearl Street even the side walk was closed with barricades and there were two police cars blocking the street.

 

Except, the police cars were an odd color of blue and had some strange-looking emblem on the doors. I figured maybe they were for some private security company since some of the banks on Wall Street have intensive security forces. There were no cops near the cars, so I walked up to examine the emblems and they did say "Police Department", but for the "City of Gotham." Ah... that explains it. I had seen some movie production trucks a block earlier. So, this had to be filming of the new "Dark Knight" sequel That had been rumored.

 

I detoured towards the south of Wall Street and then parallel to Wall Street to get to Broad Street where the New York Stock Exchange is located. They also had Broad Street barricaded, but after a few minutes of looking around I noticed them open up the barricade on the east side of Broad Street and they were letting people through.

 

Walking north on Broad Street across from the stock exchange I noticed a lot of little piles of fluffy white stuff, which I presume was fake snow.

 

Crossing over Wall Street in front of the old Morgan bank building I saw a large stream of movie extras entering the building, many of whom were in full, heavy riot gear with body armor and assault rifles. Presumably they had just finished filming on the closed-off portion of Wall Street.

 

I noticed that all of the usual steel barricades at the intersection of Broad and Wall were gone. I guess they just didn't fit into the movie screenplay. Ironic, that a movie shot with heavy security and street violence would want less security measures visible than what are normally on the street on a typical, uneventful day. Interesting how reality can be stranger than fiction – the old adage that truth can be stranger than fiction since fiction has to make sense.

 

Just up Nassau Street a half-block (Nassau is the continuation of Broad Street but the name changes at Wall Street!) I saw a movie flyer taped to a pole which detailed access restrictions that day due to filming for "Magnus Rex", mentioning the use of simulated gunfire and assault rifles (and noting that this required careful coordination with NYPD). So, yes, this definitely was probably filming for the new Dark Knight sequel. And, once again, quite ironic how with all of the tenseness and quasi-violence of the nearby Occupy Wall Street encampment (two blocks north and one block west), they would have all of this fictional violence at the same time.

 

Is fiction mocking reality or is reality mocking fiction?

 

And, as expected, when I walked along the outside of Zucotti park it was nothing but a kind of calm buzziness not unlike any NYC park – except for the uncontrolled frenzy of the drummers and the spectators egging them on as they approached their 6 PM drumming curfew.

 

AFAICT, the size of the Zucotti Park "movement" was about the same as in recent weeks. It hasn't managed to spill into surrounding areas and other nearby parks yet and is too packed for much more internal growth. In fact, the Manahatta Park at the East River end of Wall Street is still completely empty except for a few kids on skateboards and those little trick bicycles and with no apparent security guards or policemen to give them any grief. Who knows, maybe Manahatta is simply too far from the limelight of Broadway and the World Trade Center site, even if it is actually on Wall Street. There is also a reasonably large brand new park area across the street on the East River and adjacent to the ferry pier, very underutilized and completely devoid of any occupiers, but unlikely to draw the attention of anybody other than a lot of tourists and odd people like me.

-- Jack Krupansky

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 11/17: How do I know that I know?

(Please note the new time: 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM!!)

 

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, November 17, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "How do I know that I know?" What is the nature of our beliefs, our knowledge? Why do we believe things to be true? How certain are we of what we know? Why are we so certain? How wrong could we be?

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 6 attendees):

1. Is greed good? (5)
2. How do I know that I know? (6, 5)
3. Is their wisdom in crowds? (4)
4. Where are we going as a Cafe Philo? (6, 3) *
5. Is it more important to think or to act? (5)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Ignoring Occupy Wall Street for the rest of the year

I've followed the whole Occupy Wall Street movement with great interest over the past month, but it is time for me to hit the "ignore" button on them for the rest of the year (at least.) They've gotten repetitive and predictable and don't appear to be likely to do anything truly of long-term interest. Who knows, maybe they'll surprise me and somehow get their act together, but they simply don't appear to be on an upwards trend at this point, in terms of garnering significant additional deeply passionate support from the rest of the so-called 99% that is not already active in the movement. Yeah, sometimes the various unions (a small fraction of Americans all together) join in, but only halfheartedly, like with the so-called "General Strike" in Oakland right now. Sure, things could change at any moment, but I'll make that judgment on January 1, 2012 and determine then whether I can keep them on "ignore."

 

For now, I'll simply write off OWS as an offshoot of the anti-globalization movement. There's a little more to it than that, but that basically summarizes them quite well.

 

FWIW, here's how I have been following the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement:

 

The Adbusters web site. These are the guys/brains/puppet-masters behind the global "Occupy" movement. The "Culture Jammers HQ."

 

The Occupy Wall Street web site. The "official" web site for this "leaderless resistance movement."

 

The Occupy Wall Street Facebook page.

 

The Occupy Wall Street Twitter feed.

 

Google News for "Occupy Wall Street."

On a typical Saturday on my normal schedule I walk all around lower Manhattan, including Union Square, Washington Square, Battery Park, Battery City Park, the World Trade Center Site, and sometimes Wall Street and even past Zucotti Park, so I am sure I will "notice" if the OWS movement actually does take off. And I regularly walk to, around, and through Central Park on various days of the week as well, so I'll certainly notice if OWS makes good on their "threat" to "occupy Central Park" as they have said they would.

 

So, if the OWS movement does actually take off, I'll notice it first hand without having to waste another moment of my time reading about it on the Web.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

Cafe Philo in New York City next week, Thursday, 11/3: Who should we bail out?

(Please note the new time: 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM!!)

 

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet next week, on Thursday, November 3, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "Who should we bail out?" Obviously the recent financial crisis is the backdrop, but the discussion is intended to address the more abstract concept of individual and collective responsibilities with the financial crisis being a great example of principles in action.

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 7 attendees):

Can we live without Wall Street? (2)

Would dueling in salutary in a democratic society? (2)

Is America a democracy? (4, 2)

How are we experiencing aging? (3)

When and do we change our minds? (3)

Do animals have rights? (2)

Does determinism entail predestination? (2)

Who should we bail out? (4, 4) *

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Made my 22nd payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government

I just made my 22nd monthly payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government. It wasn't a large payment, just another $25, but it is a matter of principle, albeit mostly symbolic. It may take me another 50 billion years to pay it all down all by myself at this rate (and assuming the deficit went to zero immediately), but, as I said, it is a matter of principle and a sense of personal responsibility. It is our debt, not somebody else's.

 

According to the U.S. Treasury web site, the total public debt outstanding was $14,940,365,910,718.16, as of October 20, 2011, an increase of about $233 billion over 23 days or $10.1 billion a day. That was a huge leap over just a few weeks. I'm not sure what was going on there, other than some adjustment related to the end of the federal fiscal year. We'll have to see what next month looks like.

 

Here is what I wrote back in January 2010 when I made my first donation/gift/contribution/payment:

Everybody is whining and complaining about the ballooning debt of the U.S. government, but who is actually doing anything about it? Well, for starters, ME! Yes, that's right, I, Jack Krupansky, just did something to reduce the U.S. government debt. Really. No kidding. I actually paid down a small slice of this debt. Granted, it was a rather small slice, but a slice nonetheless. Okay, sure, it was only $20, but the point is that at least I am one of the very few people willing to stand up and DO something about the problem, rather than be one of the whiners and complainers who refuse to acknowledge that it is their debt and their problem, not just the fault of mindless politicians in Washington, D.C. After all, every politician ultimately answers to voters and most of the so-called wasteful spending of the U.S. government is simply politicians responding to the demands of their constituents (voters.) Maybe my one small contribution to paying down the debt won't really make any difference to any of those whiners and complainers, but for me it is a matter of principle. I consciously choose action rather than the inaction and lack of responsibility of the whiners and complainers.

If you have any sense of principle, you too can pay down a slice of the U.S. government debt yourself at Pay.gov. You can pay via credit card or debit transfer from a bank account.

 

So do the right thing and show all those whiners and complainers (including so-called "tax protesters") how mindless and spineless they really are. PAY DOWN THE DEBT! And that has to start at the grass roots with us individuals before politicians will ever pick up the lead.

 

For the record, the only real way out of the deficit is not to merely cut expenditures or raise taxes or some combination of the two, but through economic growth, which includes a healthy amount of immigration in addition to unemployed workers going back to work and young people entering the work force. Sure, we need to manage the federal budget more carefully as well and make difficult choices about the size of government and tax rates, but the big focus has to be on achieving sustainable economic growth. In truth, nobody, including all of the Nobel laureate economists, knows what that sustainable rate really is or how to get there. We'll stumble our way in that general direction. That's the way we do things in America.

 

Another note: A significant part of the deficit is businesses writing off losses from the financial crisis and recession as tax deductions. That may continue for awhile longer, but will gradually wind down and tax receipts from businesses will begin to pick up in the coming years.

 

A final note: I may suspend my payment program next month since my current contract work ended two weeks ago. I do have the cash to continue my payment program, but technically, on principle, the loss of primary income is supposed to mean that a person should cut all inessential expenses until there has been a resumption of their primary income. In any case, my public debt payment program will continue in any month that I have enough primary income to pay my rent and basic living expenses.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City next week, Thursday, 10/20: Do age and experience give you the privilege of knowing better?

(Please note the new time: 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM!!)

 

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet next week, on Thursday, October 20, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "Do age and experience give you the privilege of knowing better?"

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 10 attendees):

1. Does determinism entail predestination? (3)
2. What's up with dog people? (3)
3. Would dueling in socially salutary? (3)
4. Do age and experience give you the privilege of knowing better? (7)
5. What is the future of feminism? (6)
6. What is terrorism? (5)
7. Greed. (5)
8. Is America a Democracy? (3)
9. Are we going towards globalism? (4)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Made my 21st payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government

I just made my 21st monthly payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government. It wasn't a large payment, just another $25, but it is a matter of principle, albeit mostly symbolic. It may take me another 49 billion years to pay it all down all by myself at this rate (and assuming the deficit went to zero immediately), but, as I said, it is a matter of principle and a sense of personal responsibility. It is our debt, not somebody else's.

 

According to the U.S. Treasury web site, the total public debt outstanding was $14,707,406,820,591.87, as of September 27, 2011, an increase of about $87 billion over 40 days or $2.1 billion a day which is an annualized deficit of $796 billion. That's about $1.27 trillion over a year ago and $948 billion annualized over the past six months, our current "running" deficit. So, the bad news is that the deficit is still "sky high", but the good news is that it is trending downwards.

 

Here is what I wrote back in January 2010 when I made my first donation/gift/contribution/payment:

Everybody is whining and complaining about the ballooning debt of the U.S. government, but who is actually doing anything about it? Well, for starters, ME! Yes, that's right, I, Jack Krupansky, just did something to reduce the U.S. government debt. Really. No kidding. I actually paid down a small slice of this debt. Granted, it was a rather small slice, but a slice nonetheless. Okay, sure, it was only $20, but the point is that at least I am one of the very few people willing to stand up and DO something about the problem, rather than be one of the whiners and complainers who refuse to acknowledge that it is their debt and their problem, not just the fault of mindless politicians in Washington, D.C. After all, every politician ultimately answers to voters and most of the so-called wasteful spending of the U.S. government is simply politicians responding to the demands of their constituents (voters.) Maybe my one small contribution to paying down the debt won't really make any difference to any of those whiners and complainers, but for me it is a matter of principle. I consciously choose action rather than the inaction and lack of responsibility of the whiners and complainers.

If you have any sense of principle, you too can pay down a slice of the U.S. government debt yourself at Pay.gov. You can pay via credit card or debit transfer from a bank account.

 

So do the right thing and show all those whiners and complainers (including so-called "tax protesters") how mindless and spineless they really are. PAY DOWN THE DEBT! And that has to start at the grass roots with us individuals before politicians will ever pick up the lead.

 

For the record, the only real way out of the deficit is not to merely cut expenditures or raise taxes or some combination of the two, but through economic growth, which includes a healthy amount of immigration in addition to unemployed workers going back to work and young people entering the work force. Sure, we need to manage the federal budget more carefully as well and make difficult choices about the size of government and tax rates, but the big focus has to be on achieving sustainable economic growth. In truth, nobody, including all of the Nobel laureate economists, knows what that sustainable rate really is or how to get there. We'll stumble our way in that general direction. That's the way we do things in America.

 

Another note: A significant part of the deficit is businesses writing off losses from the financial crisis and recession as tax deductions. That may continue for awhile longer, but will gradually wind down and tax receipts from businesses will begin to pick up in the coming years.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City this week, Thursday, 9/8: Is the world going to the dogs?

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet this week, on Thursday, September 8, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "Is the world going to the dogs?" This topic was originally scheduled for the prior meeting, but was postponed due to the lack of a quorum.

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 5 attendees):

1. Does determinism entail predestination? (1)
2. Should we have dueling in a democratic society? (1)
3. What is the minimum schooling necessary for the proper functioning of democratic society? (1)
4. Should we have a universal draft? (3)
5. Is motherhood overrated or underrated? (3)
6. Is the world going to the dogs? (4) *
7. How do we decide how much money to decide to spend on social services? (3)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant, although he heads to France for the summer.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Made my 20th payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government

I just made my 20th monthly payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government. It wasn't a large payment, just another $25, but it is a matter of principle, albeit mostly symbolic. It may take me another 49 billion years to pay it all down all by myself at this rate (and assuming the deficit went to zero immediately), but, as I said, it is a matter of principle and a sense of personal responsibility. It is our debt, not somebody else's.

 

According to the U.S. Treasury web site, the total public debt outstanding was $14,620,196,583,424.20, as of August 18, 2011, an increase of about $277.3 billion over 18 days as Treasury put the debt that had been deferred using "extraordinary measures" due to the statutory debt limit over the past few months back on the books. That's about $1.3 trillion higher than a year ago and about $1.1 trillion over the past six months, our current "running" deficit.

 

Here is what I wrote back in January 2010 when I made my first donation/gift/contribution/payment:

Everybody is whining and complaining about the ballooning debt of the U.S. government, but who is actually doing anything about it? Well, for starters, ME! Yes, that's right, I, Jack Krupansky, just did something to reduce the U.S. government debt. Really. No kidding. I actually paid down a small slice of this debt. Granted, it was a rather small slice, but a slice nonetheless. Okay, sure, it was only $20, but the point is that at least I am one of the very few people willing to stand up and DO something about the problem, rather than be one of the whiners and complainers who refuse to acknowledge that it is their debt and their problem, not just the fault of mindless politicians in Washington, D.C. After all, every politician ultimately answers to voters and most of the so-called wasteful spending of the U.S. government is simply politicians responding to the demands of their constituents (voters.) Maybe my one small contribution to paying down the debt won't really make any difference to any of those whiners and complainers, but for me it is a matter of principle. I consciously choose action rather than the inaction and lack of responsibility of the whiners and complainers.

If you have any sense of principle, you too can pay down a slice of the U.S. government debt yourself at Pay.gov. You can pay via credit card or debit transfer from a bank account.

 

So do the right thing and show all those whiners and complainers (including so-called "tax protesters") how mindless and spineless they really are. PAY DOWN THE DEBT! And that has to start at the grass roots with us individuals before politicians will ever pick up the lead.

 

For the record, the only real way out of the deficit is not to merely cut expenditures or raise taxes or some combination of the two, but through economic growth, which includes a healthy amount of immigration in addition to unemployed workers going back to work and young people entering the work force. Sure, we need to manage the federal budget more carefully as well and make difficult choices about the size of government and tax rates, but the big focus has to be on achieving sustainable economic growth. In truth, nobody, including all of the Nobel laureate economists, knows what that sustainable rate really is or how to get there. We'll stumble our way in that general direction. That's the way we do things in America.

 

Another note: A significant part of the deficit is businesses writing off losses from the financial crisis and recession as tax deductions. That may continue for awhile longer, but will gradually wind down and tax receipts from businesses will begin to pick up in the coming years.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 8/25: Is the world going to the dogs?

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, August 25, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "Is the world going to the dogs?"

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 5 attendees):

1. Does determinism entail predestination? (1)
2. Should we have dueling in a democratic society? (1)
3. What is the minimum schooling necessary for the proper functioning of democratic society? (1)
4. Should we have a universal draft? (3)
5. Is motherhood overrated or underrated? (3)
6. Is the world going to the dogs? (4) *
7. How do we decide how much money to decide to spend on social services? (3)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant, although he heads to France for the summer.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 8/11: The nature of prayer

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, August 11, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "The nature of prayer." That certainly includes religious connotations, but includes non-religious connotations as well.

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 9 attendees):

1. Should we have dueling in a democratic society? (2)
2. What at the arguments, if any, for minimal government? (5)
3. Where do we go from here? (2)
4. Should all online message have first and last names? (1)
5. The nature of prayer. (6) *
6. Does determinism entail predestination? (1)
7. Why doesn't everybody love their job? (5)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant, although he heads to France for the summer.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Made my 19th payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government

I just made my 19th monthly payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government. It wasn't a large payment, just another $25, but it is a matter of principle, albeit mostly symbolic. It may take me another 48 billion years to pay it all down all by myself at this rate (and assuming the deficit went to zero immediately), but, as I said, it is a matter of principle and a sense of personal responsibility. It is our debt, not somebody else's.

 

According to the U.S. Treasury web site, the total public debt outstanding was $14,342,884,944,996.28, as of July 21, 2011, a decrease of about $1.7 billion over 30 days, but this number may be misleading since Treasury is artificially depressing debt needs due to the statutory debt limit.

 

We have reached the statutory debt limit, but I fully expect a deal before this becomes a problem.

 

Here is what I wrote back in January 2010 when I made my first donation/gift/contribution/payment:

Everybody is whining and complaining about the ballooning debt of the U.S. government, but who is actually doing anything about it? Well, for starters, ME! Yes, that's right, I, Jack Krupansky, just did something to reduce the U.S. government debt. Really. No kidding. I actually paid down a small slice of this debt. Granted, it was a rather small slice, but a slice nonetheless. Okay, sure, it was only $20, but the point is that at least I am one of the very few people willing to stand up and DO something about the problem, rather than be one of the whiners and complainers who refuse to acknowledge that it is their debt and their problem, not just the fault of mindless politicians in Washington, D.C. After all, every politician ultimately answers to voters and most of the so-called wasteful spending of the U.S. government is simply politicians responding to the demands of their constituents (voters.) Maybe my one small contribution to paying down the debt won't really make any difference to any of those whiners and complainers, but for me it is a matter of principle. I consciously choose action rather than the inaction and lack of responsibility of the whiners and complainers.

If you have any sense of principle, you too can pay down a slice of the U.S. government debt yourself at Pay.gov. You can pay via credit card or debit transfer from a bank account.

 

So do the right thing and show all those whiners and complainers (including so-called "tax protesters") how mindless and spineless they really are. PAY DOWN THE DEBT! And that has to start at the grass roots with us individuals before politicians will ever pick up the lead.

 

For the record, the only real way out of the deficit is not to merely cut expenditures or raise taxes or some combination of the two, but through economic growth, which includes a healthy amount of immigration in addition to unemployed workers going back to work and young people entering the work force. Sure, we need to manage the federal budget more carefully as well and make difficult choices about the size of government and tax rates, but the big focus has to be on achieving sustainable economic growth. In truth, nobody, including all of the Nobel laureate economists, knows what that sustainable rate really is or how to get there. We'll stumble our way in that general direction. That's the way we do things in America.

 

Another note: A significant part of the deficit is businesses writing off losses from the financial crisis and recession as tax deductions. That may continue for awhile longer, but will gradually wind down and tax receipts from businesses will begin to pick up in the coming years.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 7/28: Rules, laws, disobedience, and crime

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, July 28, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "Rules, laws, disobedience, and crime."

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 6 attendees):

1. Where do we go from here? (2)
2. Rhetoric vs. reasoning. (3)
3. What is the impact of 6 billion people? (3)
4. What is worth dying for? (3)
5. Is politics inherently corrupt? (3)
6. What is power? (3)
7. Rules, laws, disobedience, and crime. (4) *

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant, although he heads to France for the summer.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Some philosophy discussion topics

Here are a few of the philosophy discussion topics that I happened to scribble down on a recent cross-country flight:

1. Politics, games, and pragmatism
2. What is a better life?
3. Rhetoric vs. facts
4. Rhetoric vs. reasoning
5. Is analogy a form of reasoning?
6. Are there limits to responsibility?
7. What is fair?
8. What is the relationship between knowledge and power?
9. How much of what we know is wrong?
10. What is the meaning of a tree?
11. Is it your money?
12. Can reality be wrong?
13. Could reasoning have stopped Hitler?
14. How much is too much money?
15. Who wants to be a trillionaire?
16. Relationship between price and value.
17. Is there a limit to helping those in need?
18. What is honor?
19. What are the limits of honor?
20. What is dignity?
21. What are the limits of dignity?
22. What is wisdom?
23. What are the causes of wisdom?
24. What are the limits of wisdom?
25. What is proof of anything?
26. How strong a link implies causality?
27. How does the universe work?
28. Was there a time before time?
29. Do we know too much?
30. Can knowledge be dangerous?
31. Can knowledge be immoral?
32. Is suspicion worth the trouble?
33. Value of speculation.
34. Relationship between truth and power.
35. What are the limits of power?

-- Jack Krupansky

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 7/14: Does the soul exist?

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, July 14, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "Does the soul exist?"

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 13 attendees):

1. Do political borders rope people in? (4)
2. Pornography - aesthetic, political, moral, personal. (7, 4)
3. The cost of going along vs. holding your ground. (6)
4. If you won the big lottery, what would you do with your life? (3)
5. Does determinism entail predestination? (3)
6. Why do we need music? (7, 5)
7. Meritocracy. (3)
8. Privacy vs. secrecy. (7, 2)
9. Is dueling salutary in society? (3)
10. Does the soul exist? (7, 7) *
11. Obligation vs. free will. (6)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant, although he heads to France for the summer.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Do I really want to change the world?

Everybody wants to change the world, right? Or maybe we're all supposed to want to change the world, to make it a better place, or something like that. Well, I'm not sure I really want to change the world. After all, we all have our own opinions, so if we are each trying to change the world to suit our own views of what the world should be like, that suggests a lot of conflict. Sure, maybe some of us are "right" and know how the world really should be, but which of us is that? How can we know? So, my conclusion is that although it is a noble goal to want to make the world a better place, we need to tread carefully as far as thinking that we can actually change the world to be something close to what we think it should be and to expect that the result really will be a better world for everyone. Herewith, I am formally and publically declaiming any intentions or desires to change the world. That is not to say that I won't change the world or that I will give up pursuit of living a better life, but simply that change should be a side effect of living a good life rather than a goal of its own.

 

In short, I definitely do desire and intend to live a better life, but whether that results in the world becoming a better place is besides the point.

 

One caveat: In principle, I actually do believe that all change is good, but that is not to say that all meaningful change needs somehow to be intentional and carefully planned and orchestrated in advance.

 

Doing a little Web searching I ran across a blog post on the PickTheBrain blog entitled "So You Want To Change The World?" that makes these points:

• Be Mindful of Your Intentions - Are you doing this for selfish or selfless reasons?
• Be Aware of Your Own Energy - Know yourself
• Know How Other's Energy Affects You
• Humble Yourself - keep your ego out if it
• Dream

Intentions indeed. Part of my writing this post is that I am quite skeptical of people who have quite specific ideas for what change should look like. To me, that would kill a large portion of the vibrancy and health of the world and make the resulting world less sustainable.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

Made my 18th payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government

I just made my 18th monthly payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government. It wasn't a large payment, just another $25, but it is a matter of principle, albeit mostly symbolic. It may take me another 48 billion years to pay it all down all by myself at this rate (and assuming the deficit went to zero immediately), but, as I said, it is a matter of principle and a sense of personal responsibility. It is our debt, not somebody else's.

 

According to the U.S. Treasury web site, the total public debt outstanding was $14,344,559,511,924.92, as of June 17, 2011, a decrease of about $881 million over 26 days, but this number may be misleading since Treasury is artificially depressing debt needs due to the statutory debt limit.

 

We have reached the statutory debt limit, but I fully expect a deal before this becomes a problem.

 

Here is what I wrote back in January 2010 when I made my first donation/gift/contribution/payment:

Everybody is whining and complaining about the ballooning debt of the U.S. government, but who is actually doing anything about it? Well, for starters, ME! Yes, that's right, I, Jack Krupansky, just did something to reduce the U.S. government debt. Really. No kidding. I actually paid down a small slice of this debt. Granted, it was a rather small slice, but a slice nonetheless. Okay, sure, it was only $20, but the point is that at least I am one of the very few people willing to stand up and DO something about the problem, rather than be one of the whiners and complainers who refuse to acknowledge that it is their debt and their problem, not just the fault of mindless politicians in Washington, D.C. After all, every politician ultimately answers to voters and most of the so-called wasteful spending of the U.S. government is simply politicians responding to the demands of their constituents (voters.) Maybe my one small contribution to paying down the debt won't really make any difference to any of those whiners and complainers, but for me it is a matter of principle. I consciously choose action rather than the inaction and lack of responsibility of the whiners and complainers.

If you have any sense of principle, you too can pay down a slice of the U.S. government debt yourself at Pay.gov. You can pay via credit card or debit transfer from a bank account.

 

So do the right thing and show all those whiners and complainers (including so-called "tax protesters") how mindless and spineless they really are. PAY DOWN THE DEBT! And that has to start at the grass roots with us individuals before politicians will ever pick up the lead.

 

For the record, the only real way out of the deficit is not to merely cut expenditures or raise taxes or some combination of the two, but through economic growth, which includes a healthy amount of immigration in addition to unemployed workers going back to work and young people entering the work force. Sure, we need to manage the federal budget more carefully as well and make difficult choices about the size of government and tax rates, but the big focus has to be on achieving sustainable economic growth. In truth, nobody, including all of the Nobel laureate economists, knows what that sustainable rate really is or how to get there. We'll stumble our way in that general direction. That's the way we do things in America.

 

Another note: A significant part of the deficit is businesses writing off losses from the financial crisis and recession as tax deductions. That may continue for awhile longer, but will gradually wind down and tax receipts from businesses will begin to pick up in the coming years.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 6/30: What is the purpose of life, pleasure or knowledge?

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, June 30, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "What is the purpose of life, pleasure or knowledge?"

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 7 attendees):

1. Does determinism entail predestination? (2)
2. Do political borders rope people in? (4)
3. What's up with dog people? (3)
4. Humanity is too big and hungry for this earth. (3)
5. What is art? (3)
6. What's intrinsic to myth and history? (3)
7. Should we have dueling in a democratic society? (1)
8. Rhetoric vs. reason. (6)
9. What is the purpose of life, pleasure or knowledge? (7) *

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant – he hopes to be at this upcoming meeting before he heads to France for the summer.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City in two weeks, Thursday, 6/16: What is the value of college?

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet in two weeks, on Thursday, June 16, 2011 for a discussion of the topic "What is the value of college?" I suggested the topic based on recent discussions and media attention to the topic. For example,

• The New Yorker: Live and Learn - Why we have college? / Debating the Value of College in America
• The LA Times: College, too easy for its own good / Was college worth it?

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 11 attendees):

1. What is the value of college? (6, 7) *
2. What's up with dog people? (2)
3. Rhetoric vs. reason. (4)
4. Is $1 trillion enough for one person? (3)
5. Power vs. reason. (2)
6. Polarization vs. compromise. (2)
7. Should we impose penalties for people who walk using cellphones? (2)
8. Why atheism is on the rise in this country. (2)
9. Competitive world. (1)
10. How can something come out of nothing? (3)
11. Humanity is too big and hungry for this earth. (5)
12. Should we have dueling in a democratic society? (3)
13. Should modern democracies adopt the practice of denying lawbreakers the protection of law? (4)
14. Dream, idea, reality - How can we compromise? (4)
15. Does determinism entail predestination? (1)
16. Do political borders rope people in? (6, 6)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately. Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant – he should be at this upcoming meeting before he heads to France for the summer.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Made my 17th payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government

I just made my 17th monthly payment to pay down the public debt of the U.S. government. It wasn't a large payment, just another $25, but it is a matter of principle, albeit mostly symbolic. It may take me another 48 billion years to pay it all down all by myself at this rate (and assuming the deficit went to zero immediately), but, as I said, it is a matter of principle and a sense of personal responsibility. It is our debt, not somebody else's.

 

According to the U.S. Treasury web site, the total public debt outstanding was $14,345,440,513,979.37, as of May 26, 2011, an increase of about $75 billion over 42 days, about $1.8 billion a day or $649 billion per year (annualized daily deficit.) As bad as that is, it is actually better than 9 of the past 12 months.

 

We have reached the statutory debt limit, but I fully expect a deal before this becomes a problem.

 

Here is what I wrote back in January 2010 when I made my first donation/gift/contribution/payment:

Everybody is whining and complaining about the ballooning debt of the U.S. government, but who is actually doing anything about it? Well, for starters, ME! Yes, that's right, I, Jack Krupansky, just did something to reduce the U.S. government debt. Really. No kidding. I actually paid down a small slice of this debt. Granted, it was a rather small slice, but a slice nonetheless. Okay, sure, it was only $20, but the point is that at least I am one of the very few people willing to stand up and DO something about the problem, rather than be one of the whiners and complainers who refuse to acknowledge that it is their debt and their problem, not just the fault of mindless politicians in Washington, D.C. After all, every politician ultimately answers to voters and most of the so-called wasteful spending of the U.S. government is simply politicians responding to the demands of their constituents (voters.) Maybe my one small contribution to paying down the debt won't really make any difference to any of those whiners and complainers, but for me it is a matter of principle. I consciously choose action rather than the inaction and lack of responsibility of the whiners and complainers.

If you have any sense of principle, you too can pay down a slice of the U.S. government debt yourself at Pay.gov. You can pay via credit card or debit transfer from a bank account.

 

So do the right thing and show all those whiners and complainers (including so-called "tax protesters") how mindless and spineless they really are. PAY DOWN THE DEBT! And that has to start at the grass roots with us individuals before politicians will ever pick up the lead.

 

For the record, the only real way out of the deficit is not to merely cut expenditures or raise taxes or some combination of the two, but through economic growth, which includes a healthy amount of immigration in addition to unemployed workers going back to work and young people entering the work force. Sure, we need to manage the federal budget more carefully as well and make difficult choices about the size of government and tax rates, but the big focus has to be on achieving sustainable economic growth. In truth, nobody, including all of the Nobel laureate economists, knows what that sustainable rate really is or how to get there. We'll stumble our way in that general direction. That's the way we do things in America.

 

Another note: A significant part of the deficit is businesses writing off losses from the financial crisis and recession as tax deductions. That may continue for awhile longer, but will gradually wind down and tax receipts from businesses will begin to pick up in the coming years.

 

-- Jack Krupansky

 

Cafe Philo in New York City next week, Thursday, 6/2: Was monotheism a source of human progress or did it lead to intolerance?

Cafe Philo in New York City will meet next week, on Thursday, June 2, 2011 for a discussion on the topic of "Was monotheism a source of human progress or did it lead to intolerance?"

 

The suggested topics for the upcoming meeting and their votes (out of 8 attendees):

1. Why do we want or need pets? (3)
2. Was monotheism a source of human progress or did it lead to intolerance? (7) *
3. Is growth compatible with sustainability? (5)
4. Is there such a thing as emergence? (3)
5. Process vs. Results. (4)
6. Is war inevitable? (4)
7. Can we make an argument for anything? (5)

I have been acting as guest moderator lately (although Bob Pan graciously filled in last time due to my being delayed due to travel.) Bernard Roy has been attending as a participant.

 

As usual, the meeting will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the back room at Bamiyan Afghan Restaurant at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and 26th Street in New York City. In exchange for free meeting space, it is expected that each attendee will purchase a minimum of $5 of food or drink. A glass of red wine can be had for $6 (plus tax and tip.)

 

After winding down our discussion, we entertain and vote on proposals for the topic question for the next meeting.

 

There are also usually some attendees who go across the street to McCormack's Pub for drinks and food and extended discussion after Cafe Philo, but not limited to the scheduled discussion topic.

 

There are a number of small groups in the U.S. and Europe who meet regularly to discuss topics related to philosophy. Some of these groups go by the name "Cafe Philo." There is one here in New York City that meets every two weeks, every other Thursday. It is organized and moderated by Bernard Roy, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Ramapo College of New Jersey. Each meeting focuses on a specific topic which was suggested and voted on by the participants at the last meeting.

 

-- Jack Krupansky