• Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

The county unemployment rate rose to 4.9 percent in May, up from 4.8 in April, but nonfarm jobs rose by 9500.

Such seeming aberrations often occur when the school year ends, says Ann Marshall, labor market consultant for the California Employment Development Department. Teachers may be counted as unemployed during the summer months. Students leave school and enter the labor force.

The county gained 9500 jobs from April. Leisure and hospitality rose by 4900 jobs, with 3300 of those in food services and drinking places. Arts, entertainment, and recreation jumped 1300.

  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

Comments

jnojr June 19, 2015 @ 3:58 p.m.

How on Earth could teachers be considered "unemployed" when they're still being paid? Sounds like another move by the CTA to bleat for more money, fatter benefits, and spiking pensions higher.

1

Visduh June 19, 2015 @ 5:27 p.m.

They are unemployed because they're not working, and are between contract years. Some elect to draw their annual earnings in ten installments while most districts offer the option of getting twelve installments. So, during the summer break, technically they are not still being paid. Don't worry--if they are going back in the fall, i.e. have a contract offer, they can't draw unemployment benefits during the summer.

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2015 @ 7:45 p.m.

Visduh: Yes, this deserves to be stressed: if they have a contract, they can't draw unemployment benefits. Best, Don Bauder

1

Don Bauder June 19, 2015 @ 7:43 p.m.

jnojr: This doesn't mean the teachers are getting unemployment compensation. It means they are considered not employed during the summer, according to Marshall. There are two surveys: one of employers and one of households. The household survey might show teachers as not working. Best, Don Bauder

0

rehftmann June 19, 2015 @ 8:48 p.m.

There's "teachers" and then there's "teachers." Especially among college professors, way too many (according to state limits and good educational policy) are "adjunct" (aka, freeway flyers) who might show up on the first day of a semester and find out the class didn't fly, typically because they get the least desirable classes. In that case, the administration says here's a couple bucks for your trouble, thank you and good bye. Thousands of California's teachers are marginally employed (no security, benefits, seniority, standing in assignment of office space and support, etc.), especially in the eyes of a loan officer, so don't begrudge them getting unemployment compensation (which they pay into) when they are unemployed.

1

Don Bauder June 19, 2015 @ 9:08 p.m.

rehftmann: You are absolutely right about the abuse of adjunct and part-time teachers in universities. They are overworked and underpaid while some tenured faculty members loaf at good pay. It is a scandal. Best, Don Bauder

2

AlexClarke June 20, 2015 @ 5:52 a.m.

This just proves that the unemployment numbers are as phony as a wooden watch.

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2015 @ 6:16 a.m.

AlexClarke: The fact is that the middle class is shrinking dangerously, while the upper one percent and one-tenth of one percent keep getting revoltingly, obscenely richer. The fault lies greatly with fiscal and monetary policy.

Our country is becoming a Third World nation in that regard, and the unemployment rate does not reflect that. It gets too much attention from the media and economists. Best, Don Bauder

1

ImJustABill June 20, 2015 @ 10:06 a.m.

I must admit there are a dizzying array of unemployment rates from U1 (or is that a submarine) U2 (or is that a rock band) to U6.

It seems the higher the U number goes the more realistic the unemployment number really is.

From http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

"U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force."

The U-6 number from the attached website is in double-digits, which is probably more realistic in my opinion.

It's clear from many measures that income inequality is growing.

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2015 @ 4:09 p.m.

ImJustABill: Yes, U-6 is in double-digits (at least it was last time I looked) and is perhaps the best unemployment measure. There is no U-6 computed for individual metro areas such as San Diego.

Yes, income inequality is growing alarmingly. This indicates that greed has an even tighter grip on our society. This will end badly. Incidentally, I think the Pope is doing a great job highlighting the stranglehold that greed has on the world. Best, Don Bauder

0

ImJustABill June 21, 2015 @ 8:08 p.m.

I think the Pope is doing an admirable job at trying his best to live up to what the good book teaches. He has eschewed the fancy clothes, housing, and transportation that his position certainly would provide for him. And he is at least trying to clean up some of the sex abuse problems and the money laundering at the Vatican banking system.

0

Don Bauder June 22, 2015 @ 8:09 a.m.

ImJustABill: Yes, he is trying to clean up the sex abuse mess, and trying to reform the corrupt Vatican banking system. A+. In my judgment, though, his best and hopefully longest-lasting work are his warnings about climate change, and his alerting the world to the dangers of obscene income and wealth imbalance. Best, Don Bauder

0

danfogel June 21, 2015 @ 10:01 a.m.

The reason that the unemployment number seems "more realistic" the higher the number goes is each because U1 is the narrowest definition of unemployment and U6 is the broadest measure of unemployment.

In the case of U6, it combines the discouraged workers and all other marginally attached workers combined in U4 and U5 then adds workers who are part-time purely for economic reasons, in other words, people who would like a full-time job but can only find part-time work or were working full-time and their employer cut hours rather than actually laying off employees. The U6 rate has historically been double or slightly less than double the “official” U3 rate.

It is a more realistic number, when compared with the other rates. But consider this. Without going in to all the tedious details, the unemployment figures are derived from a survey. It’s called the Current Population Survey and basically is a survey of 60K eligible households. The households are divided into eight approximately equal groups. A group is interviewed for 4 consecutive months, temporarily leaves the sample for 8 months, and then returns for 4 more consecutive months. Every month, a group is being interviewed for the first time, one for the second time, and so on.
So the U6 rate is probably the most representative of the available data sets. But when that data set is derived from only 60K of the approximately 70 million eligible households, is it truly a representative sampling?

0

Don Bauder June 21, 2015 @ 7:40 p.m.

danfogel: Economists argue whether the household sample is statistically relevant. It may be. The survey of employers is generally reliable. Sometimes the two surveys point in different directions. Best, Don Bauder

0

danfogel June 22, 2015 @ 11:24 a.m.

don bauder The payroll survey encompasses 440,000 businesses while the household survey is a mere 60,000. The logical consequence is that the statistical error range in the payroll survey is much smaller than in the household survey, which is sometimes reflected by greater volatility in the household survey month-to-month results. That being said though, there are factors that could be distorting the results, such as seasonal adjustment, a respondents bias, or even actually measurement errors. As I said, with such a small sample base, is it truly a representative sampling?

0

Don Bauder June 22, 2015 @ 12:03 p.m.

danfogel: One hears different views on whether the household survey is a representative sample. It would be interesting to compare the sample size with major private sector surveyors such as Nielsen. Best, Don Bauder

0

ImJustABill June 21, 2015 @ 8:15 p.m.

I think it is hard to get a truly representative sample but it sounds like BLS (I assume that's who commissions the U1-U6 surveys) at least tries to get an accurate sample. But there must be tremendous political pressure to inflate the numbers - hopefully the system is in place to assure objective data collection.

I think back to a couple of weeks ago when Neilson sent my a few dollars in an envelope along with a complicated TV watching diary to fill out. I must confess that I figured it just wasn't worth my time and I just kept the few dollars.

0

Don Bauder June 22, 2015 @ 8:13 a.m.

ImJustABill: Yes, there is internal and external pressure to rig the unemployment and other numbers, and sometimes I think the pressure works. For example, I suspect inflation is understated because of methodology, but I cannot say for certain that the government statisticians caved. Best, Don Bauder

0

ImJustABill June 20, 2015 @ 10:15 a.m.

We do manufacture ships (NASSCO) and chips (QCOM - or at least the design of the chips) in San Diego. I think those 2 are the biggest economic contributors that manufacture something and provide a lot of middle class jobs.

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2015 @ 4:13 p.m.

ImJustABill: Manufacturing jobs rose by 300 in May from April to 97,800. Total San Diego County jobs are 1,388,700. Unfortunately, manufacturing, which generally features higher pay, is too small a contributor to the San Diego economy. Best, Don Bauder

0

Ponzi June 20, 2015 @ 11:09 a.m.

Dozens of new businesses start in San Diego. Problem is that they use the new paradigm for the manufacturing needs. Take Chris Anderson, former editor for Wired Magazine and a writer for The Economist. He founded 3D Robotics in San Diego a few years ago. They make hobby and commercial drones, or quadcopters. The first thing they did was build a plant in the maquiladora zone in Tijuana. They did not even bother to try to assemble and test their stuff in the U.S.

Although there are campaigns to "buy American" people don't. We buy what is cheap or what is often times built better and more reliable from other countries. America is in a race to the bottom with the rest of the world. Our leaders have put us in that race and we are going to have to realize that our standard of living will never again be like it was in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's. Even robotics won't save us because we are not keeping up. Japan and China are deploying millions of robots in their assembly plants to keep costs down.

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2015 @ 4:18 p.m.

Ponzi: Well said. American corporations are increasingly anti-American. Shipping of jobs overseas is just one of the ways that our own companies are harming our nation. Corporations keeping cash stashed abroad so it won't be taxed when repatriated are deleterious to our interests. Companies that "merge" with a small company in a low-tax nation, and pretend that their headquarters are there -- again, to dodge taxes -- are hurting our economy. Best, Don Bauder

0

estev1946 June 20, 2015 @ 6:39 p.m.

Don, You're probably tired of this but what's your take on Bernie Sanders? I agree with about 98% of his platform, where am I going wrong? I'd be interested on your view; or should we just resign ourselves to Hillary?

0

Don Bauder June 21, 2015 @ 6:44 a.m.

estev1946: Bernie Sanders is the one politician today educating the public about the economic dangers of income and wealth imbalance. He is also addressing other key questions. His entry into the race seems to have forced Hillary Clinton to address these dangers intelligently.

Sanders could win the nomination and probably the presidency if there is an economic collapse. But I don't want an economic collapse. I just want the capitalist system to address the factors that could lead to the system's self-destruction. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 20, 2015 @ 6:59 p.m.

Very well said, indeed.

But that's step one.

Step two is?

0

Don Bauder June 21, 2015 @ 6:48 a.m.

Twister: You didn't address this question to me but I will give my response. Step two is the complete alteration of foreign policy. It is not in our interest to police the world. It's only in the interest of the military/industrial state. We need wholesale reform of foreign policy. Best, Don Bauder

1

shirleyberan June 20, 2015 @ 2:29 p.m.

My favorite (6thgrade) teacher delivered Wonder Bread to the neighborhood in a company truck every summer for years between semesters 50 years ago, whatever.

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2015 @ 4:19 p.m.

shirleyberan: Good for your favorite teacher. Some of my teachers and coaches painted houses during the summer. Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan June 20, 2015 @ 2:49 p.m.

And Don - sometimes old memories are vague so give Brian Williams a break. He seems to be going to be okay at MSNBC I think. I'm not looking up anything day before Father's Day. I Love You for your great over abundance of kindness to me. In fact to all. Happy Grandfather's Day Loveing Man Don Bauder!! /:-/-😍

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2015 @ 4:21 p.m.

shirleyberan: I just read yesterday or today that in the investigation of Williams, his company found a number of instances when he had exaggerated his deeds on the air. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2015 @ 4:22 p.m.

shirleyberan: I will make sure my wife does not see that. Best, Don Bauder

0

shirleyberan June 20, 2015 @ 4:51 p.m.

Don- Of Course I love your wife too. Spell how much U is I Love is how to spell LOVE

0

Don Bauder June 21, 2015 @ 6:49 a.m.

shirleyberan: You mean the spelling isn't l-u-v? Thanks for the lesson. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 20, 2015 @ 7:26 p.m.

That's all there is, folks!

It's not so much the manufacturing jobs, but the talent and knowledge it takes to do them.

The central issue is that "we" are out of balance, out of plumb, lopsided, turning right into a graveyard spiral, happy as pigs in the mud. Maybe I should say dust; there won't be enough water for mud (we may get a brief reprieve if The Child dumps enough water on us this winter, but this will serve to reinforce the idea that The Lord will provide).

Even so, as good ol' Jim Wright once said, "We just can't go on selling pizza's to each other!" Locally, nationally, internationally.

Water from the Carlsbad desal plant, even at cost (claimed to be about $2,400 per acre-foot, but we know from experience to at least double that, not counting the subsidies that put the pea under another shell, so we should double the doubling to about $10,000 per ac ft. Where would you take your chip business if you needed copious amounts of water and you could get it free or, say, about $300 per ac ft?

But even that won't work, because there has to be a customer base, which will be following the lines of allocation of scarce resources that actually make sense. Suddenly, being a "survivalist" kinda makes sense. I guess I'll buy stock in water utilities.

0

Ponzi June 20, 2015 @ 8:20 p.m.

The end of work. It's coming, maybe not in my lifetime. But I clearly see it. I have been a member of The World Future Society since 1978. The predictions have not always been correct, but many have a chilling resemblance to what is happening today. Part of it is just the fact that Americans who have great wealth have bought into the scenario and are building family empires and legacies without regard to the rest of society. They are the 1% or 5%, that will sell their soul to the devil now to build a trust fund for their family, instead of contribute to the common good and strength of the nation. It's all unmitigated greed. And our current culture celebrates it like it is the new god.

We are a nation of selling pizza to each other. Though some like Elon Musk are building industries here, most of the jobs created these days are services. Millennials being the generation that is being robbed the most; student loans from phony colleges, wasting money on ridiculous grooming (waxing, hair colors, plastic surgery, tattoos), the expensive personal electronics. Then they ask why they cannot afford a home? Because all of their discretionary income is spent (not much saved) on all of the crap that their "idols" are seen with on TMZ.

0

AlexClarke June 21, 2015 @ 6:15 a.m.

Ponzi: As to savings 1. We are not taught to save. 2. The government does not want us to save. 3. Our so called economy depends on us spending all our money. 4. Wages have remained flat so it takes more of our money for basics. 5. Employers see no value in providing benefits to employees.

0

Don Bauder June 21, 2015 @ 7:57 a.m.

AlexClarke: One problem with Keynesian economics is the oncept that personal virtue is public folly. That is -- spend, don't save. That philosophy has done a lot of damage worldwide. Best, Don Bauder

1

Twister June 21, 2015 @ 7:02 p.m.

The trouble with saving is inflation eats you up.

The trouble with investing is that crashes burn it up.

Burying gold in the back yard gets dug up by thieves, who shovel your carcass into the hole and cover it up.

Were I young and healthy enough, I would buy some land where there was free water and hunt and gather--and maybe grow some crops.

If I were to spend, it would be for NECESSARY stuff, and for experiences. I wouldn't waste it on bunkers, however.

1

Don Bauder June 21, 2015 @ 7:46 p.m.

Twister: If things keep going as they are now, you could buy good farmland cheap in California. But you wouldn't have access to water; that's why the land would be cheap. Dammit all! Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 21, 2015 @ 7:54 a.m.

Ponzi: Predicting the future is a hazardous enterprise. I remember that circa 1967 or 1968, I did a story for Business Week about predictions for the future. One seer said that by the end of the 20th century, everybody -- and he meant EVERYBODY -- would be wealthy. Hmmm. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 23, 2015 @ 6:54 a.m.

Ponzi: Definitely, one of the consequences of sending manufacturing jobs to low- and slave-wage nations is that what's left in the U.S. is the service sector. And the people who clean hotel and motel rooms, along with others in so many services, make very little money. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 23, 2015 @ 6:56 p.m.

Again, Ponzi, you got dat right! And jive passes for performance. Bull$hit, prohibited on this site, is the most under-used word in the American Language.

It may be the end of work, and that would be good (I've never been in favor of "one [wo]man being used as a means of the ends of another," or any form of wage-slavery. However, it is highly likely that, in the last spasms of the most bodacious depression of all time, the kind of exploitation we saw in the Great Depression--"on steroids." There will be a max mad rush to obsessively and in knee-jerk reaction of the reactionary to maximize profits for the thinnest possible gains until the implosion is complete. Unless some nut presses some button that ends the process . . .

As you point out in other words, the ultimate in authoritarianism is hero-worship. Ironies will fly like fans everywhere.

What's TMZ?

0

Don Bauder June 23, 2015 @ 8:27 p.m.

Twister: Very descriptive: jive passes for performance. If it is original, take a bow. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 23, 2015 @ 11:18 p.m.

I ain't shinin' you on, man; I always cite sources. "To be . . . or not to be" (Shakespeare), that is still the quest of maturity, the core of intellectual discipline and an integrated mind.

"Be yourself--all the others are taken." --Oscar Wilde

0

Don Bauder June 24, 2015 @ 6:12 a.m.

Twister: I like the Wilde quote. Actually, I like many Wild quotations. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 24, 2015 @ 6:46 p.m.

Yes, but can [wo]man live by aphorism alone?

0

Don Bauder June 27, 2015 @ 6:47 a.m.

Twister: Neither aphorism nor adage be. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 28, 2015 @ 4:07 p.m.

Dear Will:

So happy to hear that you got your ouija board and crystal working again!

0

Don Bauder June 21, 2015 @ 7:49 a.m.

Twister: I own a little bit of stock in water companies, but I am cautious because if water becomes the major topic of conversation, fraudulent water companies will be popping up like mushrooms, going public, and sucking money out of investors. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 22, 2015 @ 4:58 p.m.

That's what caused the dot-com collapse.

0

Don Bauder June 22, 2015 @ 8:52 p.m.

Twister: Yes, that is what caused the dot-com collapse. It was perhaps the world's worst period of insane speculation -- worse, possibly, than the tulip bulb craze. But remember that tech stocks generally were also selling for crazy prices. I did not like the market of the 1990s for these reasons. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 23, 2015 @ 6:39 p.m.

There were a lot of hucksters who set up dot-coms to suck up venture capital, intentionally drain them through their own high salaries and perks and other questionable means, use them (or not) on their resumes (believe it or not!), and start the process all over again. And, believe it or not, some of these a$$holes have made it into high places. It's an Alice in Wonderland world.

0

Don Bauder June 23, 2015 @ 6:49 p.m.

Twister: Yes, some dot-coms were pump'n dumps. It was a wild and shameful time in the history of capitalism. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 27, 2015 @ 6:49 a.m.

Twister: In the sense that naive investors were screwed, it was. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 24, 2015 @ 6:13 a.m.

Twister: Capitalism itself is not shameful. The capitalism that we practice today desperately requires reform. Best, Don Bauder

1

Twister June 24, 2015 @ 7:52 p.m.

In what ways should it be "reformed?"

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2015 @ 1:18 p.m.

Twister: Oh dear. I have been writing about this for years. There is so much but I will note a couple of things. These are phenomena that must be eliminated by statute.

One of capitalism's biggest failings today is the notion that the board has only one constituency: the shareholder. About 40 years ago, reputable blue chip companies knew they had many constituencies: the community, employees, customers, vendors, the federal government to which they owed so much of their prosperity -- and the shareholders.

Now the only constituency is the shareholders. This leads to fraudulent earnings statements, concern about the price of the stock and not about the direction of the business, useless mergers and acquisitions, playing completely to next quarter's earnings -- a raft of misguided policies.

Other phenomena that hurt capitalism: absurdly high top management remuneration; refusal to give employees a decent living -- leading to the shrinking of the middle class that will one day wallop capitalism; private equity organizations buying a company and loading it with debt so the buyers can be reimbursed for their investment, etc. etc. Best, Don Bauder

I could go on for days on this question. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 26, 2015 @ 9:38 a.m.

Another book! ANOTHER BOOK! ANOTHER BOOK!

0

Don Bauder June 27, 2015 @ 6:54 a.m.

Twister: I am too old to write another book. But you can read the Paul Krugman column in the NY Times. You can read the observations of economist Joseph Stiglitz. Or just listen to the wisdom of Bernie Sanders. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 24, 2015 @ 7:34 a.m.

Twister: Will robots replace authors -- writing books on how robots will write books on how robots will replace authors? Best, Don Bauder

1

Don Bauder June 25, 2015 @ 1:20 p.m.

Twister: That's the point. But somebody has to program the robots. So there will be some jobs. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 24, 2015 @ 6:23 p.m.

If you were a South Seas islander before the European reformers hit the beach, you didn't know or care whose father the child was, but the social more was that "the sun shall not set on a child alone." There was no word for "steal." All people did almost everything, but those who did one thing better than most of the others specialized a bit, and shared in the catch of the day. Those who were unable to do some things did other things. Those who were extra-able found pleasure in being themselves, and were either unconscious of it or maybe bragged a bit at the numerous parties. No individuals were the means for the ends for any other individuals. Tendencies toward excess were self-limiting and environment- (which was ample) –limiting. Disagreements were resolved, sometimes by contests, but usually by councils.

You lived, loved, laughed, and died in the arms of a caring community.

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2015 @ 1:25 p.m.

Twister: Have you been reading Margaret Mead? Much of her work -- particularly about sexual mores on the islands -- has been discredited.

Actually, others have written what you noted. They may well have been right. And so too might have been Mead. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 25, 2015 @ 10:38 a.m.

What we have here is the rat-crowding experiments on steroids. The ideal community size is about 150--ask the Gore Company. Read "The Gift." That's a whole other aspect of very basic human relations. Look at some of the recent (and ancient) information on altruism and inter-specific friendship and love. Look at your dog. Do you mean to tell me that we're not as smart as dogs? Wait--don't answer that!

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2015 @ 1:27 p.m.

Twister: The experiments on lab animals, and the conclusions about behavior caused by crowding, certainly seem to be right on the mark. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 26, 2015 @ 9:48 a.m.

Re: Don Bauder June 25, 2015 @ 1:25 p.m.

Twister: Have you been reading Margaret Mead? Much of her work -- particularly about sexual mores on the islands -- has been discredited.

Actually, others have written what you noted. They may well have been right. And so too might have been Mead. Best, Don Bauder

Not just Mead. She has been "discredited" after death by cowards who didn't have the guts to debate her to a conclusion in the open while she was alive--beyond some jealous "academics" who held Kangaroo Court on her. The Samoans, having been fed the apple by the religious zealots hit the beach, turned on her in a fit of denial because of their "enlightenment" by said zealots. At the very least, the "jury" is still out.

I won't say Mead never made a mistake, but one lesson she taught me remains useful to this day--"The most important thing to know is what you don't know."

If you want to challenge my point regarding an alternative to capitalism, kindly do so point-by-point, directly.

0

Don Bauder June 27, 2015 @ 7:02 a.m.

Twister: You have observed the ugly side of academia. As soon as one academic gets popular for his/her views, others arise to denigrate the author and discredit his/her findings.

One exception is climate change, or perhaps what should be called climate chaos. An overwhelming percentage of scientists accepts the idea that humans are greatly responsible for the problems. There are naysayers, to be sure, but most of them are not legitimate scientists. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 27, 2015 @ 7:37 p.m.

Forum:

Academics should have nothing to fear but fear itself, yet the academy draws the insecure; they yearn for validation, perhaps that they never got from their daddies and mommies. The insecurity spirals ever upward, and the higher one gets the farther one has to fall. What one has professed must forever remain cast in concrete, despite shibboleths about subjecting hypotheses to scientific and "peer" scrutiny. Heretics may no longer literally be burned at the stake, but the inflamed tongues of whisper campaigns of those certified superior do do their damage.

Nonetheless, there are exceptions. Academics like Margaret and Noam shrug them off, drinking their own Mead and refusing to Chomsky at the bits of bites and bytes of sundry sorts. But they are rare. We should make a list.

The honest scholar need not rob the piggy of her skin; like the Japanese potter who never signs his work--the work itself is sufficient. How is it that the institutionalized academic, his or her office, festooned with diplomas, awards, august memberships in learned societies, differs at all from the Big Game Hunter's walls and floors of heads and hides of vanquished and vanished or vanishing species about which to brag? How do they come to fear their lessers to the point of discrediting their ideas, then stealing them, not deigning to embrace the unwashed as a true colleague? How is it that they fear to openly and honestly debate the untouchables in public?

I'm willing always to consider the error of my ways or of others like Mead, for example, and such as she would always be willing to do, but I will stand my ground, and stand their ground with them against sloppy scholarship that seeks pot-boiler publicity and greenbacks by trying to "take them down" to have their heads on their walls. One individual who did this to Mead did so on invalid "grounds," libeling his victim who was safely in the grave. This, to me, is the lowest form of self-aggrandizement.

If you still wish to consider Mead "discredited," I will consider any actual evidence. Lacking that, I suggest that you refrain from passing on judgments based solely upon fallacious arguments from authority, the lowest form of "scholarship." Either that or retract the statement.

0

Don Bauder June 30, 2015 @ 6:58 a.m.

Twister: I initially said that much of Mead's work has been discredited -- not by me, but by others in her field. Then I went on to say that she may have been right. I can't retract the statement because I was only making an observation -- that much of Mead's work has been discredited by some of those in her field. I don't think one can argue with that. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister June 27, 2015 @ 7:38 p.m.

Forum:

As to climate change, there can be little doubt that climate changes. I, personally, do not deny that climate change probably is due, in some significant part, to anthropogenic causes. But so far, I have not seen a clear (in terms that the non-specialist can come to understand without getting a degree in the subjects required to reach such a conclusion) exposition of the evidence that excludes (and in what part or percentage) other causes. [Note: Given the limitations of space, I am omitting some discussion here.] Further, I have seen no quantitative, specific data that defines a goal (for, say CO2 reduction) and how the various "measures" to compensate for anthropogenic effects have been measured in terms of meeting that goal--and just how this would work over time and what the unstated consequences would be. That is, science needs to go beyond the "hockey-stick" graph; then it has to rank the various measures and set priorities from which effective policy can be devised and enforced. "Carbon credits," for example--for starters.

I eagerly await said information and reasoned, unemotional correction.

DO bother me with FACTS. Don't bother me with opinion, no matter how "authoritative." And please, please, do not admonish me to read books that do not contain complete chains of evidence.

0

Don Bauder June 30, 2015 @ 8:06 a.m.

Twister: Again, as with Margaret Mead, I can only give you facts: the overwhelming majority of scientists in relevant fields agree with the basic concepts of climate change. I can't give you a correction because as with Mead, I did not state an opinion on the subject, and am not qualified to do so. Best, Don Bauder

0

Sign in to comment

Let’s Be Friends

Subscribe for local event alerts, concerts tickets, promotions and more from the San Diego Reader

Close