" Develop interest in life as you see it; in people, things, literature, music - the world is so rich, simply throbbing with rich treasures, beautiful souls and interesting poeple. Forget yourself."
- Henry Miller
"Once you commit to bringing more of a sense of play into your daily round with authentic personal pursuits, life will begin to take on a harmonious lilt."
- Diane Johnson
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Libraries as Travel and Destinations.........
"While today I see libraries as places of organization, scholarly research and intellectual discovery, they still haven't lost their romance in my book, connoting style and a little mystique."
http://www.etsy.com/storque/spotlight/etsy-finds-its-classified-9424/#comments
Oh yea, makes the Back to School feeling all that more exquisite......
http://www.etsy.com/storque/spotlight/etsy-finds-its-classified-9424/#comments
Oh yea, makes the Back to School feeling all that more exquisite......
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Travel without staying in a hotel......Social B&Bs.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
What does Chanel No. 5 Smell Like?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/the-chanel-no-5-story-961226.html
No. 5 Fragrance Notes:
Top Notes: Ylang-Ylang, Neroli, Aldehydes.
Middle Notes: Jasmine, Mayrose.
Base Notes: Sandalwood, Vetiver.
http://www.fragrantica.com/perfume/Chanel/Chanel-N-5-608.html
No. 5 Fragrance Notes:
Top Notes: Ylang-Ylang, Neroli, Aldehydes.
Middle Notes: Jasmine, Mayrose.
Base Notes: Sandalwood, Vetiver.
http://www.fragrantica.com/perfume/Chanel/Chanel-N-5-608.html
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Andy Grove's latest and dissenters......
The Andy Grove Essay:
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/07/the-andy-grove-essay.html
***************************************************
Andy Grove: Knowledge Work Isn't Enough
Chris Murphy on Jul 6, 2010 10:53 AM
Intel co-founder Andy Grove doesn't have all the answers in his Bloomberg column on "How to Make an American Job Before It's Too Late." But he makes one opinion clear: The U.S. can't innovate if it doesn't also build stuff.
Among many intriguing ideas in the full column, which you should read, Grove attacks the notion that the U.S. can focus on knowledge work, doing the design and engineering and feeling comfortable leaving the manufacturing to lower-cost countries.
He offers two main reasons. One, that approach just doesn't create enough jobs. Writes Grove:
Startups are a wonderful thing, but they cannot by themselves increase tech employment. Equally important is what comes after that mythical moment of creation in the garage, as technology goes from prototype to mass production. This is the phase where companies scale up. They work out design details, figure out how to make things affordably, build factories, and hire people by the thousands. Scaling is hard work but necessary to make innovation matter. The scaling process is no longer happening in the U.S. And as long as that's the case, plowing capital into young companies that build their factories elsewhere will continue to yield a bad return in terms of American jobs.
And two, the U.S. won't create enough great startups if it's not also manufacturing. He cites the advanced battery market, which is poised to boom with the growth of electric cars:
A new industry needs an effective ecosystem in which technology knowhow accumulates, experience builds on experience, and close relationships develop between supplier and customer. The U.S. lost its lead in batteries 30 years ago when it stopped making consumer-electronics devices. Whoever made batteries then gained the exposure and relationships needed to learn to supply batteries for the more demanding laptop PC market, and after that, for the even more demanding automobile market. U.S. companies didn't participate in the first phase and consequently weren't in the running for all that followed. I doubt they will ever catch up.
Grove offers some prescriptions that will rankle any free trader, including taxing foreign-built goods and banking that money to help companies that scale up U.S. production. But more broadly he argues for "job-centric political leadership" and "job-centric economic theory."
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2010/07/andy_grove_know.html
************************
WSJ rebuttal: http://blogs.wsj.com/financial-adviser/2010/07/06/andy-grove-from-intel-is-wrong/
Includes:
And yet, I wish Grove could point out one country in the 100,000-year history of mankind that flourished because of protectionism. In this country he even points out: “Most Americans probably aren’t aware that there was a time in this country when tanks and cavalry were massed on Pennsylvania Avenue to chase away the unemployed. ” He’s referring to 1932. What a short memory America has! Much of the reason for that unemployment was the trade wars started by the ultra-protectionist Smoot-Hawley tariff signed into law by Hoover in 1930. Look at when Japan and Germany opened up their doors to free trade in the decades post-WWII and you can see, by contrast, how quickly an economy can flourish when free trade is the norm.
*****************
Another dissenter: http://www.enterpriseirregulars.com/21226/andy-you%E2%80%99re-late-and-you%E2%80%99re-wrong-about-jobs%E2%80%A6/
My problem with this is a simple one: Just as Grove mistakes the ability of large centrally run corporations to create jobs and do well by the worker, he also mistakes the ability of a large centrally-run government to do well by the worker and create jobs using tax policies. Isn’t it ironic that small and decentralized is so much more efficient than big and monolithic? Isn’t that the real lesson of Silicon Valley, rather than the Intels of the Valley? Isn’t it also the real lesson of the American way where individual voters and capitalists decentralize government and business?
These policies he advocates will, as Grove points out, largely serve the interests of the Big Companies (those who are “scaling out”) who weren’t the job growth drivers even before all this manufacturing outsourcing had taken such root. Today, not only are they not job growth drivers, they’re net job exporters. Moreover, what role did Grove play in doing his own outsourcing at Intel? They were busy building multi-billion dollar chip fabs while he was CEO until 2005. Did they all get built here in America? Aren’t you late to this party and didn’t you have a hand in some of the problems you’re raising?
Now as I said, there are some things to like about the article. I do agree with Grove, particularly in the economic situation we find ourselves in, that as he puts it, “Job creation must be the No. 1 objective of state economic policy.” Unemployment in this country has reached ridiculous proportions, and the primary thing we seem to be doing about it is giving people government jobs and projects to work on. The predictions on what happens to the jobless rate when the temporary census workers go back to being unemployed are scary. BTW, how long exactly will it take businesses to build the giant new plants here at home needed to get back out from under those taxes? Can we really afford to wait that long? And how efficiently will whatever agency administers this plan be at not handing it over to cronies as a rich new source of high pork-content budget dollars?
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/07/the-andy-grove-essay.html
***************************************************
Andy Grove: Knowledge Work Isn't Enough
Chris Murphy on Jul 6, 2010 10:53 AM
Intel co-founder Andy Grove doesn't have all the answers in his Bloomberg column on "How to Make an American Job Before It's Too Late." But he makes one opinion clear: The U.S. can't innovate if it doesn't also build stuff.
Among many intriguing ideas in the full column, which you should read, Grove attacks the notion that the U.S. can focus on knowledge work, doing the design and engineering and feeling comfortable leaving the manufacturing to lower-cost countries.
He offers two main reasons. One, that approach just doesn't create enough jobs. Writes Grove:
Startups are a wonderful thing, but they cannot by themselves increase tech employment. Equally important is what comes after that mythical moment of creation in the garage, as technology goes from prototype to mass production. This is the phase where companies scale up. They work out design details, figure out how to make things affordably, build factories, and hire people by the thousands. Scaling is hard work but necessary to make innovation matter. The scaling process is no longer happening in the U.S. And as long as that's the case, plowing capital into young companies that build their factories elsewhere will continue to yield a bad return in terms of American jobs.
And two, the U.S. won't create enough great startups if it's not also manufacturing. He cites the advanced battery market, which is poised to boom with the growth of electric cars:
A new industry needs an effective ecosystem in which technology knowhow accumulates, experience builds on experience, and close relationships develop between supplier and customer. The U.S. lost its lead in batteries 30 years ago when it stopped making consumer-electronics devices. Whoever made batteries then gained the exposure and relationships needed to learn to supply batteries for the more demanding laptop PC market, and after that, for the even more demanding automobile market. U.S. companies didn't participate in the first phase and consequently weren't in the running for all that followed. I doubt they will ever catch up.
Grove offers some prescriptions that will rankle any free trader, including taxing foreign-built goods and banking that money to help companies that scale up U.S. production. But more broadly he argues for "job-centric political leadership" and "job-centric economic theory."
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2010/07/andy_grove_know.html
************************
WSJ rebuttal: http://blogs.wsj.com/financial-adviser/2010/07/06/andy-grove-from-intel-is-wrong/
Includes:
And yet, I wish Grove could point out one country in the 100,000-year history of mankind that flourished because of protectionism. In this country he even points out: “Most Americans probably aren’t aware that there was a time in this country when tanks and cavalry were massed on Pennsylvania Avenue to chase away the unemployed. ” He’s referring to 1932. What a short memory America has! Much of the reason for that unemployment was the trade wars started by the ultra-protectionist Smoot-Hawley tariff signed into law by Hoover in 1930. Look at when Japan and Germany opened up their doors to free trade in the decades post-WWII and you can see, by contrast, how quickly an economy can flourish when free trade is the norm.
*****************
Another dissenter: http://www.enterpriseirregulars.com/21226/andy-you%E2%80%99re-late-and-you%E2%80%99re-wrong-about-jobs%E2%80%A6/
My problem with this is a simple one: Just as Grove mistakes the ability of large centrally run corporations to create jobs and do well by the worker, he also mistakes the ability of a large centrally-run government to do well by the worker and create jobs using tax policies. Isn’t it ironic that small and decentralized is so much more efficient than big and monolithic? Isn’t that the real lesson of Silicon Valley, rather than the Intels of the Valley? Isn’t it also the real lesson of the American way where individual voters and capitalists decentralize government and business?
These policies he advocates will, as Grove points out, largely serve the interests of the Big Companies (those who are “scaling out”) who weren’t the job growth drivers even before all this manufacturing outsourcing had taken such root. Today, not only are they not job growth drivers, they’re net job exporters. Moreover, what role did Grove play in doing his own outsourcing at Intel? They were busy building multi-billion dollar chip fabs while he was CEO until 2005. Did they all get built here in America? Aren’t you late to this party and didn’t you have a hand in some of the problems you’re raising?
Now as I said, there are some things to like about the article. I do agree with Grove, particularly in the economic situation we find ourselves in, that as he puts it, “Job creation must be the No. 1 objective of state economic policy.” Unemployment in this country has reached ridiculous proportions, and the primary thing we seem to be doing about it is giving people government jobs and projects to work on. The predictions on what happens to the jobless rate when the temporary census workers go back to being unemployed are scary. BTW, how long exactly will it take businesses to build the giant new plants here at home needed to get back out from under those taxes? Can we really afford to wait that long? And how efficiently will whatever agency administers this plan be at not handing it over to cronies as a rich new source of high pork-content budget dollars?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
