Jobs that don't go away

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.  - Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love.

I do appreciate the sentiment of the quote, but there is a problem with it, for me, in that I grew up in a socialist household and it was preached at me that an hour's work is worth an hour's work, no matter what you do.  That came from the conception of communism and collectivism that put forward a bucolic view that all work was equal and that a man should have equal results from spending a day where he fished for a couple of hours, then tended his garden, mended his clothes, shoed his horse and then went and did an hour of real work and yet would receive recompense for the entire day doing things.  Karl Marx railed against the breaking down of work into smaller processes that could be specialized and each sub-process done quickly by an individual who only had to learn one skill to work for a wage.  This is called a 'division of labor' and Marx hated it as it divorced humans from the world where they should be able to do anything they wanted and have equal recognition for that work.  As much as a number of people adore Heinlein, I hate that quote as it speaks to the division of labor and what it has allowed the world to accomplish.  It has a mistaken belief behind it that any human can turn their hand to any task and be equal in performance, results and pay.

And yet that is just not the case, is it?  You should be able to turn your hand at various things in your life, yes, but your results will vary. 

I'm a generalist, believe me on that.  Being able to turn your hand to any task requires a mindset, an attitude and an aptitude to accept failure and that failure is an indictment of lack of skill, by and large, not a lack of trying.  You don't get paid for trying, you get paid for doing.

In America, today, we have an unemployment problem and it has nothing to do about unemployment and lots to do about how our society has changed its evaluation of work.  Since the start of the Progressive Era, the one that would try to make those who went through school as unlike their parents as possible, there has been an inculcation of the meme that 'to get ahead you need a diploma' or that 'a college degree means you will make more at any job you do'.

These are lies.

I saw that directly as I took up geology in university and the US had just hit the 'oil patch': the place where geologists from the small oil companies, some with multiple degrees under their belts, were flipping burgers just to get by.  A degree, higher education as a pathway to a good job are lies.  At the same time as I was getting a degree in geology, I was putting enough course work in to nearly minor in computer science, my second early love, and that proved to be a rewarding combination.  Note that these are not areas in the 'humanities' or ones that have a racial or ethnic or gender hyphen to them: math is required.

So are labs.

The lab work is that extra credit hour that goes with the main course and without which you don't get a grade.  A putative one hour lab never lasts one hour... and it doesn't matter if they only get the room for one hour or not unless it is the strictest form of lab where you must hand in your observations and results right there at the end of one hour.  I had, exactly, one of those.  Physics, of course, show all work and hand it in as far as you can process it through because methodology means more than results: do the right method and the results should follow.  A lab for seismic prospect, however, could eat up the minimal lab time and then, as you got to keep the results to keep on working at them, you could spend untold hours after the actual lab to get results.  There, in the drilling for oil and gas realm, results matter and your methodology better be correct.  Those labs are ones where you could easily spend ten or twenty hours and be working right up to the hand-in time... and only then find out the professor didn't give out enough information at the start... yet, even for the wasted time, you learned a lot.  Ditto the chemistry labs and labs on things like sedimentation where you could get one wrong sieve in place and lose a week's worth of work that you just don't have time to go back and complete because time and gravity determines how quickly sediment settles.

You can't BS your way to lab results.  Period.  And yet lab work is just a reflection of how gathered material and information are examined, and in geology that means you get field work to do the initial gathering.  Gathering data by something other than remote sensing and actually doing 'ground truthing' can lead to jobs that take you to the middle of absolute nowhere and then involve mucking around in soils, sediment, rock, rivers and streams, and then know that the tent you brought with you is your only real form of life support and comfort.  At the end of every long, winding dirt road is something a geologist wants to look at... or at least that is the way it seemed during field camp.

What you get from the sciences, engineering, technology and machinist world is one in which your political viewpoint doesn't get results.  Results are done through procedure, process, verification and testing.  If you think just because you are of some race, gender, ethnicity or that you are 'special' in any way, shape or form: try doing some work in the fields where education only matters in getting results via proper method, not good feelings.  At the height of the insanity in the old USSR there was the actual belief... taught understanding... that Communist science was different from Capitalist science.  That what you believed would offer you an entirely different set of Natural Laws.  Scientists outside the USSR came up with a term to describe this sort of thinking (I mean that is what those in the sciences do, after all, is discriminate and define... not attempt to define and then force the world to work to the definition) which holds for the entire field of 'good feeling' above hard results via methodology:  Lysenkoism named after Trofim Lysenko.  Lysenkoism believes in predetermined results and then doing everything to prove the results, including adulterating lab results to fit the predetermined schema.  Luckily Lysenko got Stalin to believe in this process and it set Soviet genetics back by decades, which is very lucky as it set their bioweapons programs back by the same amount.

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a form of Lysenkoism.  Anything that shows contrary to the predetermined belief that the globe is warming due to mankind's industrialization, like temperature readings showing that the globe has been cooling for a few decades, is thrown out in favor of the predetermined result.

Now with students graduating with tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt for their higher education, we are seeing that the predetermined belief that a college education gets you a decent job... and therefore a good life... is a lie as well.  It is Lysenkoism in service of Progressivism, and when you can tell them apart, let me know, wouldya?  The result of making sons and daughters as unlike their parents as possible is the destruction of the work ethic and the understanding that there is no such thing as a bad job.  That took me awhile to understand growing up, as I also had that belief, but after temping out doing all sorts of jobs, I learned differently.  And with college graduates with hyphenated degrees, degrees in the 'humanities' that have little to do with human nature and more about political indoctrination, we now find ourselves with a decaying infrastructure and little to no appreciation of what it takes to actually have a civilized, modern world.

Mike Rowe started out with about a single seasons of Dirty Jobs to do at the Discovery Channel, and figured that would be it.  A nice program to fill up some time  after he had quit being an opera singer because, really, he was an understudy and would probably always be an understudy.  I'm sure there are films about how all you need is one Big Break of the Star Performer having laryngitis, getting a broken leg, etc. for the understudy to come forward and shine... but those are movies for Hollywood, not real life.  In real life, results matter.  Mike Rowe has a great voice for TV and his voice-over narratives on shows like Deadliest Catch, amongst many, gave him a way to feed himself while he looked for other work he could do.  Dirty Jobs let him explore that 'other' work... and then the fans kicked in for seven more seasons of the program's material.  At Profoundly Disconnected there is a graphic that sums up the decades of lies comparing the poster at the guidance counselor's office and what Mr. Rowe has learned about the world:

Photo courtesy: Profoundly Disconnected

Because of the glowing belief of the 1970's that children should be aspiring to the sheepskin and not to the factory floor, we are now at a point where the jobs of actually cleaning and maintaining our modern infrastructure is putting civilization at risk.  Our way of life depends on jobs that include: welders, pipe fitters, ditch diggers, masons, sanitation workers, and much, much more.

Julie Kantor at the HuffPo, and that is a leftist, progressive rag if they actually printed the thing, but since it is done with electrons and semi-conductors you don't get bird cage liner, was out doing her bit to help create some livable space for monkeys and ran into Mike Rowe:

Rowe with his signature baseball cap and jeans pointed out that in the '70s, colleges created a poster campaign that told us to work smarter not harder, and the campaign was spectacularly successful! Rowe also shared his view that this campaign was the worst advice ever given. Why?

Because...

Out went vocational education and skills-based learning for jobs.

In came college, college, college-bound, NCLB, college loans, and over a trillion in debt.

We shifted focus off of skills and trade and the great equalizer of our country became to get kids college bound and degreed.

We became a country where testing scores are currency and not whether a child can show up on time, a positive mental attitude, focused resume and a work ethic to become an expert in a craft or skill.

We forgot how to just make something that America could sell and many 'dirty jobs' were viewed as beneath us in our quest to work smart but not necessarily hard.

Mike and others have pointed out time and time again to us that most jobs require a two-year degree (yeah, community colleges!) or less, and technical training and certifications. Also pointed out is that many of these jobs, especially if technology or engineering are involved, can start with salaries in the late 40's and 50's. The U.S. Department of Labor shares that only 18 percent of jobs require a 4-year college degree.

"We must be prepared with the skills for America so America will be prepared," said the dynamic youth president on the podium at opening night. The event resembled a Junior Olympics or rock concert with "America Needs Me" posters abound.

I spoke to him afterwards and he would like very much to be a STEM teacher in Automotive Technologies for a few years once he finishes his two-year degree and he plans to continue his education from there.

Rowe suggests that the new motto should be to 'Work Smart and Hard.' That's a campaign we can all get behind. Whether you go to a 4-year college, or a 2-year college, or get some vocational training, know what the jobs you want requires education-wise and what jobs pay to help you map out your decisions and training. Now that's smart!

I hope you will also be touched for the very first time by SkillsUSA and groups like 4H, Girls Scouts, DECA, YearUp, Invent.org, Youthbuild, NFTE and more that teach real deal skills.

And companies... if you haven't already and your struggling to hire...

The estimates vary, but there are between 3 and 5 million dirty jobs in the US going unfilled.  These jobs impact getting construction work done, maintaining roads and bridges, replacing water mains and sewer systems, maintaining and replacing the current electrical grid... none of this is glamorous, none of this is what you would call high tech, but each and every single item in our infrastructure will not last without maintenance and repair work.

We have changed from where being a politician was a job, to one in which it is a career... and yet politicians build nothing, create nothing, and only act as parasites within the organs of the civil body.  They stick around too long with ideas that are outmoded and seek a predetermined end.  Politicians love to classify things into jobs that require government... and they can and do build edifices and those are the warning signs that we must regard, today.

As the saying goes, Rome wasn't built in a day.

It was, however, sacked in three.

What is the amount of time it takes to go from civilized society to being uncivilized?  Three days.

We are missing hundreds of thousands... millions... of jobs by teaching a generation that they are 'special' and that everything they do is 'special' and that Big Brother Government will always take care of them when they fall down.  From our history we can see that Rome also stood on a similar precipice, where the freeman was marginalized by the slaves and freedmen who were connected to the rich, while the citizens of Rome became marginalized.  Yet the Eternal City would not fall completely, even after sacking... that would take a later invader who understood that the aqueducts allowed Rome to be the size it was, and destroyed them.  For its day that was a complex system, and yet in mere years, Rome shrunk from Imperial Capital sized to modest town by a river size.

What killed Rome wasn't the sacking, but the aqueducts being destroyed at key points.  The sacking of Rome was a mere warning sign on the road to barbarism, and yet it was not seen as such.

That is where our civilization now stands: awaiting some key failures for vital infrastructure that we have no one to deploy to repair.  We have seen the acts of barbarism but do not understand that they are symptoms of a disease, at best, not the thing, itself.

Imagine the main water system and supply of any major city not undergoing a terrorist attack, but just failing at so many points due to neglect that the entire system begins a cascade of failures that turns a major metropolitan area into something that only the surface carrying capacity of the water and ditches can support.

The Progressives grew out from Marx's ideas.

If you adore Heinlein you are looking to become a generalist.

I'm letting you know that the good skills necessary to support yourself and others aren't hard to get... Mike Rowe understands this... but you are only special when you are doing a function that is necessary to the support of civilization. 

From Gods of the Copybook Headings by Rudyard Kipling:

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."

Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!

If you don't work, you die.

Plan for a job and a life, first.  Then figure out what you need to get it.

Not the other way around.

And if you have no idea what you should do... pick up some welding skills.  Carpentry.  Brick laying.  Pipefitting.  Electrician.  Plumber.

And if you can't decide, just start doing jobs and picking up skills as they come by.  For while specialization builds a civilized society and infrastructure, the generalist survives its collapse.  That collapse is always just three days away.  You can still do other things when being a specialist on the job... I heartily recommend it!  Do not let your job define you.  You must define yourself and your job is just something you do.

The skills are way cheaper than a four year degree, and won't leave you with a mountain of debt.  And you should be able to find a job in THIS ECONOMY to start your life.  Decent pay.  Debt free.  Good job.  Do you really want more out of live.

Temp out if worse comes to worse, and get a cross-section of skills: refuse nothing from cleaning out old warehouses to setting up pools on windy days to going out in the field to collect soil samples from waste dumps.

Oh, illegals aren't doing these jobs NOW and won't be doing them if they become legalized, just so you know.

'Lose the suits, grab some boots and get a Dirty Job.'

- Mike Rowe and the unofficial theme song of Dirty Jobs.

Unthinkable, thought

The Economist presents an article on 02 DEC 2010 on How to resign from the club.

The 'club' in question is the Eurozone, and resigning from it is presented as a showing how Nation States can get over a debt crisis via examining past such crises in other Nations. The EU has a problem in that it is not a Nation State but a cooperating agreement amongst Nation States and, thusly, more of a confederation than a federation (as these things are normally termed for such governmental arrangements). Thus leaving the EU would be done to localize debt to those debtor Nations within the EU and as a result end the Euro as a currency. The article presents the rationale for this, but does not come down in an advocacy position, but a neutral one as this is an article to examine the process not the implications of it beyond the economic.

To start the reasons for leaving are put into question form:

The idea of breaking up the currency zone raises at least three questions. First, why would a country choose to leave? Second, how would a country manage the switch to a new currency? Third—and perhaps most important—would leavers be better off outside the euro than inside it?

Why Leave

First is the 'why' question for a country - what is the rationale for this leaving of a common currency?

The primary reason is economic independence from the common currency and there is a reason for doing so for both strong and weak economies (as measured in their economic activity, debt load and state of solvency).

Germany, with a relatively robust manufacturing economy that has been shedding social programs and increasing the retirement age, is seen as able to cover its debt better than other Nations in the EU. Thus their portion of the common debt would have the backing of a strong currency and even see an influx of funds from other countries from individuals seeking a 'safe haven' for their cash. This would require massive changes to the banking regulation which seeks to get at savings accounts outside the country, but that could be put down as effective for EU funds only, and those converted to other currencies (like the brand new Deutschmark) would not have that regulatory overhead. This would be kept in check, to a small extent, by keeping lines of credit open for liquidity to foster economic activity. The change-over would cause an export problem as the strong DM would mean that the value of its goods would rise as compared to under the Euro, but that would be from a stable economic base that has actual liquidity to it. Thus a transition, though hard, would not be expected to be long.

Greece and weak countries, at the other end of the scale, also need economic policies that reflect their populations. The Euro has been no boon to these countries, either, as the ability of the earned Euro to purchase goods from stronger Nations within the Eurozone has decreased. Weaker economies having to compete inside the Eurozone are unable to do so and they are pressed from the outside by Asian manufacturers able to undercut Eurozone production costs. Thus, while holding to a Euro means having a more powerful currency, you have far less of it due to lack of economic activity and governmental promises on retirement and other payouts to selected groups of people within their Nations. Leaving the zone means that these countries (Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland) can put out currencies that can be devalued and yet find a stable floor based on the state of the economy. These Nations would become quite poor as they have a non-economical basis for their social structure in regards to working life, labor costs, and taxing policy, all of which would return to local control without EU overhead. And independent Nation is better able to navigate social policy, as an example, than a larger Confederation forcing an end social policy via a currency and regulatory system that does not take local conditions into account. These Nations did not change their policies coming into the Euro, beyond some one year benchmarks, and continued their spending policy for a generation based on lower interest loans garnered by joining the EU. Now that all comes due with defaulting on debt looming on the horizon.

How to Leave

The 'how' part is the mechanical part - the way to get from Point A to Point B.

Here the article is short and sweet, with some analysis after:

How could this be done? Introducing a new currency would be difficult but not impossible. A government could simply pass a law saying that the wages of public workers, welfare cheques and government debts would henceforth be paid in a new currency, converted at an official fixed rate. Such legislation would also require all other financial dealings—private-sector pay, mortgages, stock prices, bank loans and so on—to be switched to the new currency.

That plus have the printed and coined new currency ready to go, and having the banks exchange the old and new. The original set conversion ratio would last for a period of time and then the old scrip is no longer legal tender (although a minor collector's item for numismatic enthusiasts for generation after). This has been done a few times in the history of the US and happens far more frequently outside the US.

Argentina is a Nation that did this during its fiscal crisis and, as a result, destroyed its own banking system with a contraction in available credit to cover losses on loans that had a more favorable exchange rate than other items so as to keep savers mollified.

Germany would tend to have a stronger currency than an abandoned Euro, not only because Germany has left the Euro but due to the Euro having represented an average value across all Nations: the less capable Nations brought the value of the Euro down as they did not change social and fiscal policy to that of thrifty Nations like Germany. A new DM would gain its own adherents and those that then convert their local currencies on the basis of the DM for purposes of trade and commerce. The cost of the value of its debt would fall, over time, if it could keep its fiscal house in order and maintain a productive economy with low economic overhead by the national government. Its current holdings in other EU countries would be devalued while its own currency gained strength, and limitations on capital movement from weak countries would limit the ability of Germans to shift those funds or convert capital into liquid assets.

Weaker Nations would have to set limits on the amount of withdrawals per person, per year to transfer into a DM. This is on top of the losses that all people would suffer (personal, commercial, financial and institutional) due to the sudden change in value of the Euro in regards to the currencies leaving it. Those in weak countries paid in devalued currency would not like that state of affairs and yet see that they have limits on exactly how much of that currency can leave the Nation. This acts in the form of a firewall that limits currency trading and capital flight at the expense of internal accounts being devalued. Thus some capital is retained even during a general currency devaluation. Here good laws would allow for a legal process of wealth transformation to take place so as to avoid lawsuits over the incurred costs of devaluation. The internal scrip for these Nations would be debt obligation (or IOU) scrips that would, over time, be converted to a real currency. It would be an extremely devalued currency, yes, but the only one for legal tender in the Nation after all the Euros had been converted to them.

While a shrunk Euro would still have its member Nations to back it, those outside of it would be faced with the EU board acting to the interests of members... although the question of how long the Euro would survive comes into being with Germany leaving or one or more of the weak economies deciding to 'go it alone' to survive.

Fallout

Shifting a National currency, even when done via normal means such as the need to replace one format of bank notes with another or going on/off a gold/silver standard is one that does happen for normal Nations. In the latter part of the 20th century this has happened more often than most people think as you consider the Nations that have gone off of a worthless internal scrip to create one of value: Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, East Germany (moving to the DM then Euro), and Russia. These Nations all faced a scrip that was uniform under Communist rule, but of no real value outside of its trading block. Dollars went for ten to one hundred times the official exchange rates inside these Nations, and when time came to break away their currencies got unhooked from the centralized system run from Moscow. We don't notice those change-overs, in the West, but they did happen quietly and efficiently as the Eastern Bloc vanished in a matter of years, taking Russia with it out of the Communist era.

Argentina has been more problematic, but while facing a set of challenges for having a currency not pegged to a foreign currency, it is a set of problems largely under the control of the Nation and its policies. That is the goal of the exercise, to bring the financial house under sovereign control and have a Nation set its own path on what is agreeable and disagreeable to it and suffer what fate hands out to those choices.

The US

The United States has many artifacts of the EU in its common currency arrangement: member States taking on huge debt load at rates that they could not normally get, a massive decrease in productivity due to the overhead of the State, and the flight of capital and individuals from some States to others. Additionally the National system has taken part in multiple Ponzi schemes for public programs, these being Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, all while enacting laws and regulation that increase the cost of manufacturing causing a flight of capital overseas for decades, thus lower the rate of economic growth. On a National level spending, regulation and social payouts are the mirror of that in some European Nations now looking to cut back on them severely: Great Britain, Germany, France. Meanwhile there is also a debtor State problem with a number of States with their own social programs that are fiscally unsound in the realm of public spending: CA, NY, IL, MI, MA all come to mind.

There is already the start of a debt scrip system going on in CA as the State is now offering IOUs to those who should receive refunds on their income tax. At this point CA does not accept such scrip to pay off debt to the State, but the moment it does so it has its own and devalued currency. NY has made some similar sounds as well as a few other States so highly in debt that they cannot offer standard refunds on taxes.

This state of affairs of States having their own currencies existed right up to the Civil War and is perfectly legal but how you do it is important, and CA is not headed into good territory there.

Here are the powers of the Constitution in this realm:

Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

[..]

Section. 10.

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

CA is running afoul of Section 10 of the US Constitution and to complete its system of scrip would be required to offer gold or silver backing for its debt obligations. Basically a gold or silver debt scrip.

Just how much gold and silver does CA have? Beyond what is in 'them, thar hills' not much due to the FDR Administration having gold taken into Ft. Knox from all over the Nation as it was illegal to have large quantities of gold. Which brings up the question: is it legal for the US federal government to have done that? As the States are permitted to make legal tender of gold and silver, does the US government have the power to stop them from doing so by confiscating the gold and silver from those States?

Consider a proposal to have CA, say, ask to have its portion of the US held gold and silver reserves returned to it via population size. It would be recognized that the federal government has its own need of reserves and that could be made at 30% of the total held for the Nation.

Just working with gold the US has 4,603 tons, or 147.4 million troy ounces, the latter of which is easier to work with for numbers (going via Wikipedia for ballparking here), and this isn't including other bullion reserves like those at West Point.

So a proposal to keep 1/3 in reserve for the federal government means the following is available to the States via population: 98.27 million troy ounces.

Current population of the US at the census site: approx 311 million people.

Current population of CA: approx 37 million.

Call that just a bit shy of 12% of the population, which would yield it 12% of the gold: 11.8 million troy ounces.

Total long and short term debt issued by CA (Source: CA Treasurer's Office): approx. $53.3 billion

Note that CA's debt is huge compared to any price of gold today.

With that said the State would have the legal basis to offer a currency with a conversion rate to the US dollar for CA incurred debt. If set sufficiently above the current rate of conversion, say at $1,500 per ounce, the new Golden Bear (which I invent for this purpose) currency would have a lower valuation than US currency but have full gold backing to it. CA could start issuing this currency to those who would be getting tax refunds or other forms of funds from the State and create a dual currency system within the State for its own gold tender and standard US greenbacks. In addition CA would probably place a holding time limit for cashing out gold, so that the Golden Bear will have time to circulate and get a real value, perhaps as much as 5 years for that.

CA would then have to decide if it wanted to incur debt via US dollars or its own Golden Bears. While 11.8 million troy ounces sounds like a lot, that is less than 1/3 troy ounce per citizen in the State. If CA can get its fiscal house in order in 5 years, stop the debt outflow and get a sane tax climate in place for investors, it can offer a 'safe haven' currency that is gold backed (possibly have silver backed ones as well, but it is difficult in getting the silver reserve figures) and holds the State to the value of the currency.

The Golden Bear would be a 'hard' currency and if set above the current conversion price of gold, then gain few attractors but serve as a reserve system to pay off internal debts owed to the citizenry. Citizens would be faced with a currency that would take a few years to convert to physical gold (with 1 troy ounce = 1.0971428571 ounce = 31.1034768 gram) with each Golden Bear dollar only about 0.02 gram weight or waiting to get paid in US greenbacks once CA got more of those to go around... which it might do by marketing Golden Bears or converting a portion of its debt into Golden Bears for payout (possibly the short term debt). Once in circulation the value of the US greenback would float compared to the Golden Bear and it is possible that CA might even see an influx of some cash if it can get its fiscal house in order.

Of course CA and probably AK would see a major uptick in the gold prospecting business as getting gold and getting gold backed tender in return makes the gold portable. CA might see an increase in gold reserves, over time, if it got its house in order. Other States might take this route to try and get some foundation to their economies and find some, final bottom to their fiscal woes as they have a new and much smaller economic platform to move to. This would mean that most of the 'services' in the way of regulations, 'entitlements' and even such things as public pensions would either get liquidated or devalued or have a final gold backed tender put into their holdings which they can sell at market prices.

Congress did not have the power to stop this after the Civil War and no power was given to it during or after then to allow it to stop such things: they are allowed in Article 10 explicitly. While paying off debts to the federal government would still be done in greenbacks, if those are seen as getting worth less and less, then the States would have a means of fall-back currency by issuing gold and silver backed tender based on the holdings being held for all of the people at the bullion depositories. The US federal government would still have a substantial gold and silver deposit for the Nation, but the rest would be used by the States to create legal tender in the States for State obligations. And as it is circulated debt backed by gold, it is not normal valued currency and might be impossible to tax (can you tax debt? my guess is: no).

A two-track system would be a PITA, to be sure, for each State, yes. But this might be a way to give the people of those failing States some assurance that there is a final, much smaller, fall-back position for their States that would have an opportunity to shed obligations and right their economies. And with a gold backed system the people would be assured of being able to get some useful currency after their State's bankruptcy and re-ordering to become solvent. We would still be a common Nation, but those in financial crisis would be allowed to figure their way out on their own and not put the entire Nation at peril for the spendthrift ways of the few.

Two scandals, one theme

There are two recent scandals that have very similar themes to them, and their parallels are interesting.

Phase I : The Start

First is the Madoff Ponzi Scheme started by a then young and up-and-coming investor who demonstrated some knowledge of the market and decent returns. He decided on a methodology of using secret sets of data for market forecasting and putting out graphs that showed a steady return on investment, year on year, if you just invested with him. A few inside members of his family and financial coterie knew that was nearly impossible to do, yet he was able to show the payouts. If the market went up, he went up steadily and if the market went down, he went up steadily: Bernie Madoff obviously had a secret way to know just which companies to invest in to yield that steady return on investment. He could show graphs of market sectors and show how his earnings correlated with some, but not all, market segments and that by the investing system he had, he could show that his services could obviously steady out market fluctuations and do better than just track the market.

Second are the individuals who put out a paper in the mid-1990's that demonstrated that a group of trees in Siberia were following 'instrument' readings and that there was a steady amount of 'global warming' witnessed elsewhere, too. Indeed they could show that carbon dioxide was a 'secret ingredient' to global warming and that the trees tracked that perfectly and were good measures for temperatures. They then had a select sub-set of trees that were claimed to be representative of the whole and tracked the whole very well and were useful as indicators for whole forests. That secret sub-set of trees wasn't put out, and its data held outside of greater review by the scientific community. Whenever questions of temperature fluctuations arose, they could point to the predictive 'hockey stick' graph that proved that the entire system was warming year on year, regardless of fluctuations. Not all indicators could be explained away by this, of course, but the claim was that they had 'other factors' and 'weren't indicative' of the whole planetary climate. By using a secret subset of data and special interpretations, those pushing global warming claimed that their methodology was superior to any others.

Phase II: The Deception

Madoff flouted the regulatory schema, and even was able to win popular approval for his work from regulators who would over-look minor problems and even recommend that he address Congress on financial matters. That ability to ride out the internet bubble surely showed that he had some great way to beat the averages. Yet, even by the late 1990's, a market analyst and mathematician was showing that the financial numbers that Madoff published could not be right: they were based on market factors that demonstrated volatility and he was inflating numbers beyond what the market return would allow him to do. Even with that regulators would not examine the Madoff Empire, and he still had the ears of those in the halls of power in DC and easily continued his 'market beating scheme' for years, gulling people with his lovely numbers that were not sustainable when analyzed. Yet he convinced regulators who investigated that all was on the up-and-up and that his books were in order. Really!

Critics of global warming started to notice that there was a non-correlation between graph data actual data, that there was something badly askew from what those publishing the data purported and what the data showed. Yet, by then, those pushing the line of alarmist global warming had already won over the minds of politicians and power brokers, and used their power to stifle the opposition. They would use their names at prestigious venues to continue showing that their numbers were 'right' and that they were, indeed, on the up-and-up. As other global data sets acted in non-accordance with the hypothesis of 'global warming' those pushing it then resorted to culling data, showing incomplete data sets and purporting that they were the whole thing. Yet when publications came in to ask 'where is the data' and 'how do we know its verifiable', the supporters would show their sub-sets and show that their books were in order. Really!

Phase III: The Cat Let Out of the Bag is a Beast

The day came during an economic downturn when a number of investors in the Madoff Scheme needed their money. One or two Madoff could handle, but when heavy investors started to ask for their money, they got subterfuge, excuses, and partial payouts. Something was up and when those representing the individuals holding funds in the Madoff Scheme examined the record, they found the financial and mathematical analyst that had, for years, been showing that there was something seriously wrong with what Madoff was doing. Even with that regulators were put off, but not permanently, and as the number of customers grew, the hue and cry increased and Madoff finally had to do something. When the numbers started to come out the Ponzi Scheme was revealed, and it was massive, the largest ever seen.

The day came when a number of skeptics and journals started to demand the original datasets on tree rings, as later evaluation of the actual forests and trees revealed a non-correlation between long published data and the current data. Graphs had been broken down, analyzed and shown to have some data sets grafted on to others, and yet other sets 'adjusted' by yet other sets of data, all which tended to skew the results being shown. The day came when those holding the data had to respond, publish a paper and also release the data set to a third party. When that data got out, others started to raise questions on methodology and measuring practices, and if the original researchers had considered that there were systemic errors in data sets they used. Still the supporters used their contacts to put off such hard questions, and when governmental requests for information came in, the researchers stalled or claimed to have 'lost the data'. Finally, one day, the data sets that had been used for multiple papers were released, along with the documentation on what was being presented, what held back and why. The scheme to distort the numbers so as to get certain ends out of the political system, be it mere grants and contracts or larger payoffs via industrial regulation changes, were revealed to be a huge fraud in the scientific arena, far surpassing Lysenkoism and the Piltdown Man scandal. Truly no one had ever seen such a distortion of science before.

As I have always said: you must show me the numbers, that is the actual, real data, on global warming for me to even consider it as a hypothesis. Now the numbers are coming out and just like with Madoff, they don't add up.

Phase IV for Madoff was trial(s) and imprisonment for fraud.

Phase IV for 'global warming' is just starting and those involved in it will continue to use anything in their means to put of a day of reckoning. The reason there will be no Cophenhagen Treaty on Global Warming, is that there is something rotten in the State of Denmark that global warming activists have brought with them.

Looking at Brookings and the Iraq Index

My thanks to larwyn for pointing me to American Thinker article: The Missing Context in Media Reporting on Iraq By Gerd Schroeder. And from there on to the Brookings Institute and its Iraq Index. What follows is a basic look at the numbers, which I am *not* going to take forever and three days copying and pasting over.

The Brookings Institution has done a summary of its on-going findings in Iraq covering a broad array of issues and topics. This is, perhaps, one of the broadest looks at the entire Nation taken and is, thankfully, ongoing. Their latest (in pdf form) is here. Now instead of piecemeal and having to scramble around for sources, basic summary numbers can be seen and analyzed at a 'one stop shop' that even includes views on *other* studies and number sources. So you can see how they get to their numbers in comparison to other folks.

While they want to concentrate on 'the surge' numbers up top, the trends are the more telling things in this sort of report and give a deeper picture of how Iraq is changing good, bad and indifferent. One does not hawk just the good or just the bad, but takes a broader and contextual view of things and, when some deeper numbers appear to have out-of-context reports, then looking into those are necessary. Hopefully *that* can be kept to a minimum.

On the surge, on p. 9 is the summary of Civilian Deaths due to insurgent violence two months prior to it and the first two months of it, which saw a heavy escalation in explosions and such (mentioned later). The summary deaths are *down* and sharply overall, with only 'Suicide Bombings' (vest bombs and VBIEDs) rising. These are, of course, the more telegenic forms of attack, and garner the most visibility and are, generally, the easiest to carry off as the bomber is expendable.

Further on p. 9 we can see the estimated number of Iraqis killed per month (all sources) is down from a high in NOV 2006 by a bit more than 20% although just 10% up from FEB 2007.

Looking at US troop fatalities on p.11 one minor, but interesting artifact is that Operation Together Forward, the last attempt pre-surge to deal with Baghdad violence did work, but only for a limited time as it had no follow-on for sustainment of its stabilizing effects. When the troops left areas, the violence returned. This is part of the change of Counter-Insurgency work so as to leave useful forms of stabilization capability not only in military and police roles, but in civilian recovery and infrastructure roles.

That stabilization is taking place due to Iraqi Military and Police units stepping into that stabilization role. As seen on p.15 the initial deployment of limited troops and police by Iraqis met with a high death toll. What has happened is that the number of their forces have drastically increased and their competence and confidence have similarly increased as seen on p.32. That FEB-JUN 2005 period marked the first full deployment of police and military capability that had been slowly worked out during the previous two years. Finally amalgamating National Guard and Army duties and working out Border duties between police and military allowed for fewer and more well defined organizations to finally come into being. This was the period where so many decried the 'incompetence of the Iraqis' before they had actually gotten trained, equipped, and had their duties straightened out. Color me non-plussed at the time as that was evident by what was going on. By doing that these organizations have worked out plans for figuring out their necessary sizes to cover areas of operation and even had projected end-strength goals of their OWN to meet by the end of 2006.

Both the military and police organizations are now hard at work estimating what will be needed for their increased duties this year, and the military side is looking to stand up more air force capability, at least two more full divisions, possibly *another* armored division, and take on coastal and riverine duties. At this point in time there are more police officers than total American Armed Forces and almost as many Iraqi military forces as Total American Armed Forces and those are both projected to increase. US force size and composition has bounced up and down over time, pointing to difficulties in getting a long-term strategy in place, seeing its effects and adjusting as necessary. Many things have been tried, and a few of them have failed, but the learning curve is finally grabbing hold of events and an understanding of what it takes to actually get a successful plan made is getting into shape. Expect more set-backs and changes as there is an enemy out there.

On p. 33 we get to see what the enemy is doing: staging lots of attacks. Insurgent responses have been to MNF and Iraqi changes in plans, and reflect the ups and downs of that. The late 2005 Riverine Offensive to shift to Tal Afar is directly mirrored by increased insurgent attacks, while those drop very quickly once offensive. Similarly Operation Together Forward in JUN-OCT 2006 saw an uptick in violence and that was augmented by the first establishment of Sunni police from the Tribes in Anbar over that period. These two operations overlap and the build up late in 2006 is a demonstration of preparations by insurgents to address 'the surge'.

The political front on p. 10 shows the logjam in the Iraqi Parliament and the slow workings of it. The Oil Revenue Sharing plan and Repeal of some of the de-Ba'athification laws are still in the stages of work prior to voting. Better election laws and getting the summer provincial elections scheduled haven't made progress, but the elections previously held were ones scheduled by the US and MNF, and getting these things worked out in a parliament can take time. Similarly there is no law on disbanding the militias, although the Iraqi Army has been given the go-ahead by al-Maliki to just kill them, which is a good exercise of Prime Ministerial power to remove insurgents. On Sunni reforms: they have taken a back seat due to less than full Sunni participation on previous things.

The true bright spot is the Anbar Awakening council forming into Iraq Awakening which will be a Tribal/Provincial based movement starting in Anbar and the Tribes are now working in Diyala to get it spread there. This is the most significant progress done with the Sunni's to date as it will give them increased say on local and provincial matters and will be the FIRST party based on true Tribal and Provincial outlooks as a cooperative arrangement. Three long years of working with the Tribes in Anbar and other provinces may finally yield the very first of its kind Arab 'bottom up' party not seeking insurgency/jihad/tribal squabbles but working with other Tribes to give Iraq grass-roots National support. Outside of the Kurdish provinces, this is unknown.

From the Political Freedom Index on p. 33, a derived Index of multiple things like property rights and such, Iraq currently hits about where the Palestinian territories are, which are below Israel, Lebanon and Morocco, but above Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Algeria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Libya (in order, selected interesting Nations by the author).

From p. 34 we get a view on Press Freedom which puts Iraq pretty far down the list, behind Libya and Syria, but ahead of such notables as Vietnam, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Cuba, and way ahead of North Korea. Further in Iraq there were 300 political parties listed for the 2005 elections, which knocks that of most other Nations and points to the highly factionalized atmosphere left over from the Saddam era. The Nation had been so heavily turned against itself that 500 separate parties could identify themselves as separate factions. Even Italy never got to that! Actually, this is a good thing to start with so many parties as it then allows for coalition and cooperation to form newer and broader based parties over time. This is necessary in the provinces and I would expect that a few parties that have little in the way of National presence will find actual voice in the provinces. Perhaps something less than 100 parties able to gain voice, say... but still a far more vibrant form of democracy than is seen in other parts of the world.

On the civil administration side for getting criminals behind bars, p. 43 now shows there to be a growing court system in Iraq, that is still only about 60% of need. It takes a long time to get judges trained in how to *be* a judge, and that initial surge of older lawyers and judges being re-educated must now slow as new judges are trained. This will take time and expect to hear about an 'overburdened court system' there. Just like in America!

Now for the brass tacks sort of stuff on p. 35. The economy of Iraq has changed in a huge way since the Saddam era and is *still* undergoing changes as it has not stood up fully yet. With the oil production chart we get a look at the hard and fast limits of the Soviet era technology that was additionally degraded by lack of maintenance and oversight for decades. Just enough to keep it running under Saddam, but not much else. The estimates I have seen prior to this put the potential for that infrastructure for oil at 2.3 million barrels per day, and the current production is at the 90% mark of that. Actually, that is sustainable, given the infrastructure. What is changing that is *new* equipment and replacement of older equipment slowly happening. The oil forecast is even brighter, which I went over in this post. Part of the fortuitous joining of Anbar tribes is the revision upwards of the oil reserves there, and that puts the Sunni Arabs in a much better position economically and in the Nation as a whole. That said the entire infrastructure left over from the Saddam era needs replacement from top to bottom and that is a 20 year outlook at the very least.

New production, however, backed by Western and Japanese interests will push the overall production up, over time, and as re-investment and maintenance take place those will also incrementally improve the situation. Saddam exported nearly ALL of the oil and kept very little for internal use for Iraqis, and the lack of refining infrastructure shows that. The early push to get everything working showed short-term promise, of course, and bought time, but the sustainability issues can be put off no longer. You cannot continue at peak utilization of old equipment like that and expect to have a long-term production and refining capability. Getting that maintenance schedule up and running for regular, annual maintenance is imperative and we are now starting to see some of the cyclicity. This means that the performance of the system will gradually improve, but that the time to start investing in future exploration and refining is *now*.

To gloss over p. 36 would be to miss that cyclicity and the variability of the oil market itself. Iraq will see month-to-month contractual changes in oil prices and getting a firm export amount will help to stabilize that and get longer term contracts in place. Japan is foremost in wanting to do that and are willing to bring some of the best expertise to the table to *get there*. After the Japan (as seen on p. 40) has the largest vested interest in Iraq and over the long haul their needs are far more important than ours and they are shelling out about HALF of the non-US Nation State aid to Iraq. Japan is only now starting to upsize its Navy and Armed Forces and looking to get a Constitutional change to allow Armed Forces to operate offensively overseas. This is a hard sell to Japan, but there is a basic recognition of stagnation there if supplies cannot be gotten into trustworthy hands. In a decade there may actually be a real military presence from Japan to do that, but it will be a long time coming. So their looking to invest *now* means a long term change over for them and their overall support of Iraq.

On to p. 37 we see the electricity situation, which the US Army Corps of Engineers place on a cycle where their last involvement would end around 2015. Let me point out that the pre-war Saddam era electrical production capability may have been a maximum if all the equipment worked. It didn't, as USACE pointed out, and much of it had been converted from natural gas to crude oil and has to be re-converted back to natural gas. Here, and again, this is mostly old Soviet and French technology, and it has suffered the similar neglect of the oil infrastructure. Production capabilities rarely meet optimum output and even more rarely maximum output, so putting a figure that by all accounts was the maximum output for the Saddam era and comparing it to daily sustainable output is a bit misleading. The existing plants are old to nearly obsolete and end of life-cycle so that entire gas/petroleum fired set of plants needs to be replaced. Any other sources would be handy, of course, but hydro-electric and distributed sources will only yield a fraction of what is necessary to run the Nation. That said they are still getting more daily electrical use than is Syria. A final problem is the purchase of televisions, computers, and all sorts of other electrical equipment by individuals and families in Iraq: that is making things difficult to handle, and the pre-war use basis was on minimal availability of such things. Getting to as much availability with a much higher load is a hard job to do, which is why more power generation ability is needed above and beyond just pre-war supplies.

Water and sewage projects have been a top concern, also, and of all places that show the differences between maximum and optimal use, it is here. The corrosive effects of water and sewage means that equipment will, literally, rust away if maintenance is not done regularly, and p. 45 shows that clearly. Much of the Saddam era capacity was targeted towards Baghdad and a few other places and the rest of the infrastructure rusted. Decrepit is not the word for it, upon arriving in Iraq, and the work of just getting pipes in to replace old pipes, get pumping stations working and make sure that the water and sewage lines were not damaged has eaten up a lot of time and budget. This is one of the areas that Iraqis are shifting into the fastest, after security, as the ability to get clean water to people and remove and treat sewage is vital. For all of that Saddam era treatment capacity, raw sewage was dumped straight into rivers. That alone points out the difference between theoretical capacity and actual capacity. In cities outside of Baghdad some facilities were just overgrown with weeds and such, so this is a very long-term infrastructure need of Iraq. Amazing that what has been restored or gotten to some places for the *first time ever* has allowed the revitalization of the agriculture sector and businesses to re-open.

Thus we come to p. 41 and GDP figures, which have been damned hard to come by! Iraq has gotten its act together on the economy, although much still has to be done as noted above. That traditional non-oil GDP percentage is sitting at 1/3 of the economy and desperately needs to change to at least 50%, in my opinion, over the next 5-7 years. That 30% inflation rate shows the problems with the economy, and the prior problems of estimating such in previous years. The p.42 chart on this shows it higher, but mostly to start re-aligning fuel prices with the world market and NOT subsidize it. Plus as seen on p.43, the differential between the two is extremely *high* and to not run into an Iranian situation with runaway internal use, the linking of such things as gasoline and diesel fuel to world prices is necessary. Of all things, Iraqis did not like that very much at all, but it is absolutely necessary to get fuel consumption under control, but then they went on a car buying spree as seen on p. 44. Restrictions to *new cars only* were put in place, but Iraq is still a smuggler's haven for cars, so the increased mpg of newer cars will not show up any time soon.

Now that there are real, internal organs of government able to look at this, we can see that reaching the goal of the IMF to 15% is a hard one. Early forecasts have not proven out due to over-optimism. With that said a stable manufacturing base for Iraq will bring that down quickly as capital investment and jobs start to give consumer confidence for longer-term expenditures. Here is where getting the security situation in hand helps in multiple ways: it allows for longer-term spending for business and industry to happen, spreads jobs and increases stability and confidence in the future. You can't get industrial production without infrastructure, and you can't get that without a secure environment that allows for long-term investment with expectations of payback on that investment.

From p. 41 is the Iraqi debt structure which has changed downwards from 2004. A lot of that is forgiveness on the part of many companies and countries on Saddam era debt. Re-structuring of re-payment schedules has also meant a lower payment amount and may stretch out some debt but allows for it to be manageable. That largest payoff, however, has been due to Private Creditors and is a huge plus mark for recognizing that private investment and reliability are necessary for future financial growth. Those that have been willing to re-structure debt via the Paris Club have also seen gains and losses, but that is a big plus for Iraq financially. That leaves those still holding Saddam era debt and the need to purchase equipment and supplies from various Nations that do not have a debt relief or forgiveness policy in place, and that has grown by 11% in terms of dollars and now is the largest source of debt for Iraq.

Finally there is the personal liberty and freedom side of Iraq, left unaddressed by most articles and pundits. Starting from p. 43 we can see that the use of telephones has been a major business in Iraq and here the ease of setting up cell phone towers and putting up a digital network has far outstripped the ancient land-line infrastructure. The previous estimates were based on using ONLY land lines and supplementing here and there with cell phones, but the companies of the region have all chipped in along with many others to start getting a new, wireless infrastructure in place for communications. It is quite possible that Iraq will be one of the first 'all wireless telephone' Nations with wired phones making up only a few percent of all telephones. That is the trend we are seeing today and laying communication lines only for long-haul telecomm is far cheaper than wiring out to individual homes and offices. This is just a reflection of a global trend that started a decade ago, and third-world and developing Nations will reap the most benefit of this.

Along with telephones we now see personal computers (p. 44) and cell phone enabled web-surfing as a major growth area for Iraq. Internal to the Nation is an entire set of web sites that we, in the English speaking world, have little insight into. This intra-Iraq communication venue is also changing viewpoints on how information flows and what good government means to Iraqis. There is also a utilization of the older media which has flourished under the removal of Saddam era restrictions. There were NO commercial television or radio stations and no independent newspapers or magazines under Saddam. Zero. That has changed immensely with 54 commercial TV stations, 114 radio stations and 268 independent newspapers and magazines (dailies, weeklies and monthlies). That is why so much in the way of electronic equipment is being sold: there are new ways to gain entertainment, news and other programs. Plus various political parties, social groups, and all sorts of other forms of journalism are seeing a massive upsurge in Iraq.

On unemployment, I never did trust those first figures from the standing up of the Central Bank, way back when, so these are a bit better, for all the fact they are estimates. This entire area is wholly depending upon the basic infrastructure stand-up so that factories and manufacturing capability can stand up in places like Ramadi and other towns and cities. That is *finally* happening this year and Ramadi looks to be a focal point for that, although other cities and towns have just as desperate a need for their workforce to actually *do something*. Ramadi is important as it is a lever point between Baghdad and Tal Afar: flex Ramadi and the entire length of Anbar will be effected. Investing in jobs and production capabilities means that employment spreads for subsidiary jobs and then outwards as more work needs to be done. Ramadi, alone, can employ just 200,000 or so folks at its factories and that does not include: transport, delivery, supply companies, waste management and so on. Standing up production at a factory is a huge boost to the economy and doing that at multiple places not only employs people there, but at the support industries for those factories. That cannot be done with a lawless insurgency happening, and these numbers should show diminishment as production comes on-line. Right now, seen on p. 56, Iraqis rate the economy as poor by a majority at 59%.

More children are getting educated, as seen on p. 45, with enrollment being far from universal, but increasing. This is a long-term vital area for the Iraqis to get the majority of people educated in even the basics, which is a prime concern for a Nation that used to pride itself in its educational capabilities.

Putting it all together puts us in p. 46 and the various polls taken in Iraq, and the outlook of Iraqis on their Nation. It is unsurprising that Security and Political/Military concerns eat up nearly 80% of all concerns for the population. Doing some break-outs on the basic which way is the Nation going, we see the Ethnic and Sectarian differences showing up. Sunni Arabs don't like being out of power and think things are going badly. Shia Arabs are about evenly split which is a huge improvement as if you could take something like this under Saddam the then/now contrast in that community would be startling to *get* to 50% on the good side. The Kurds are more highly optimistic and less pessimistic which is based on their long standing outlook as a culture and the ability to have some self-rule without Saddam. They have a better 'feel' for things with self-direction and only worry in the 'Quite Bad' area by 30%.

The largest split on p. 47 is a direct reflection of these changes: who controls Iraq? In the Shia Arab and Sunni Kurdish communities it is overwhelmingly in favor of Iraqis now controlling the Nation while the Sunni Arabs think that it is the US. That needs to change starting at the tribal basis and may do so with provincial elections and Sunni political parties actually gaining control of local governments by vote. Further on p. 47 is the basic resentment of the Coalition Forces in Iraq by the Arab communities, Sunni and Shia, and the overwhelming support for it by the Kurdish community.

Given these things looking at the basics of will your child be better off than you are question we see Better winning out over worse and by a 2:1 Nation-wide over the same. Again the Sunni Kurd and Shia Arab communities see better by 50% and 66%, which balances out the Sunni Arab 6%, and this is also a factor of lack of jobs, and such in Iraq and the lack of Sunni Arab buy-in after being in power for so long. This strange dichotomy of 'not wanting the Coalition Forces' there, but seeing a brighter future while they are there is one that has been vexing, overall, particularly with the Arab Shia community. All groups think there should be a 'timeline for withdrawal' as cited on p. 57, which explains some of the feeling for foreigners having to fight in your own Nation. I have yet to see a poll asking if a 'timeline for withdrawal' will help or hurt Iraq, because the implied is that it will help. This idea of resentment of foreign forces, no matter how necessary they are, is somewhat sustained by the p. 52 approval of attacks on US led forces, which are pretty near saturation for the Sunni Arab and has nearly 2/3 approval from the Shia Arab. The next question on the Iraqi confidence in their own forces to protect them is, I believe, some of the highest you will see for that anywhere in the Middle East outside of Israel and Turkey. Thus a further question would be: 'do you believe that Iraqi forces could handle the violence without foreign help?' Yes, there are questions and there are real questions, and often the implied of a question belies what is not being asked.

Again the internal breaks for who Approves (p. 48) of the Prime Minister's job handling is that of strongly majoritarian for Sunni Kurds and Shia Arab, and little from Sunni Arabs (broken out on p. 55). This is almost the same break-out for the National Assembly seen on p. 49 and the 'one year out' view.

Going to p. 48 and seeing the support for Unified Country, Regional States and Separate States, there has been a downward trend in Unified Country. This is, of course, an outgrowth of getting National politics rolling before Provincial politics and the first provincial elections and a few years with *that* will finally start to firm things up in this. Strange to say, but I do not think that provincial government will firm up support for a non-unified Nation. As soon as you can put a *real face* to local politics it goes from something unknown and possibly palatable, to something known and run by politicians. Another decade or so should demonstrate full trends here, and the 5-year outlook on p. 53 supports a Unified State. Also the view on corruption being a major problem in Iraqi politics is overwhelming with 43% citing 'a lot' and 22% citing 'some' (p. 56).

A fun statistic is the internal view on the Civil War question of seeing if one is going on now. This breaks down along the three lines, and I think a basic idea is as follows:

Sunni Arabs - "Of course there is, the Shia's need *someone* to rule them."
Shia Arabs - "What? No Civil War... a bit of payback for what was done to us..."
Kurds - "Arabs are *always* finding a reason to fight."

Probably very un-PC of me to see it that way! On p. 50 is about the only misleading graph I've seen at this point, and that is one that lumps the Sunnis together for a 'Sectarian violence' improving question. This does not show the problems of regions and the opinion of the Kurds, which the Irbil line clearly shows. This one is a story not told in the light of the way previous questions were broken out and obfuscates complexity by trying to make pure Sectarian views the only ones, while regional outlook is also a prime factor.

For all the conflict going on, however, on p. 50 the question of 'Has anyone you known moved away the last four years due to security concerns, the overwhelming majority at 72% Nationally is known. Here, I would expect any breakout to show that Sunni Arab population has fled, but that the Kurds, in particular would say almost no one has moved.

Startlingly on p. 51, the majority of ALL murders and kidnappings are in Baghdad. Basically the Kurds are secure, the Shia areas more or less secure and the Sunni areas likewise. Yes, the violence in Baghdad has been bad and very much so. Most of the rest of the Nation has seen only sporadic violence in comparison. That said 3/4 of Iraqis rate the security situation poor in Iraq overall.

The Right/Wrong direction for the Nation graph is interesting in that it hits a low point for 'Right Direction' in Spring 2006 just after the Riverine campaign and then heads steadily upwards again. The 'Wrong Direction' has been sharply up and down since Fall of 2005 and it is hard to see any trend there, save that of Sunni Arab resentment due to the clearing of the Riverine area and the concentration of violence in Anbar. It will be interesting to see if that reverses down again, and what the 'Right Direction' will do with that. However there is one thing that *everyone* agrees upon in Iraq, and that is on p. 53: A strong government that will get rid of Militias. The Shia Arab have the *lowest* percentage on that at 65%, the Kurds at 82% and the Sunnis at 100%! Now if they would only stop *joining them*.

The overall Ethnic and Religious break-out of Iraq still puts forward the main views of the Nation: Shia Arabs are generally optimistic and glad to be free of Saddam, the Kurds are quite optimistic of the future and the Sunni Arabs are still resentful, as of the dates of those polls regarding such, and see themselves being unfairly targeted and have problems dealing with a future in which they are not in control. Resentment of foreign forces is across the board and the support for the Iraqi forces is surprisingly high, and much higher than most other Middle Eastern States that use those forces for internal repression. That is, actually, a very healthy sign of Iraqis willingness to support their Nation so that they can learn to take care of themselves, and it is their political class that has to look towards tempering that emotional need with the hard reality of building an Army and a society which is self-sustaining, of which neither will happen quickly nor easily.

Getting the economy actually started is the next major step in Iraq. Infrastructure, though only at about half-capability, is enough to sustain actual manufacturing at some locations and start the employment and jobs cycle going. The banking infrastructure still needs work, but the view of getting that *right* before allowing foreign banks in is one that is not only realistic but necessary: it doesn't help to open up banks that will have drawing accounts for terrorists or for Saddam's stolen funds. An accountable system of banking and funds that support the local economy and encourages investment in it, is something that is necessary as part of the economic stand-up.

And the economy requires getting things secured to the point where Iraqis trust their own forces to handle things on their own. From the internal views that have been seen Iraq is about half-way to having a properly sized Army and Security Forces sector (National and Local Police). Just as Ramadi will flex the economy, Baghdad will flex the entire social structure of the Nation, and ridding it of violence and actually providing jobs to work at is necessary. The untold secret of the current 'surge' operations is that the Iraqi side of things is seeing a heavy influx of Kurdish units to handle Baghdad. No one wants to talk of *that* particularly the Left as it shatters the meme that the Kurds will not help the Arabs inside Iraq. It is that meme that has dragged down such analyses from multiple sources and finally needs to be put at rest once and for all. Luckily it is not just the Kurds and the fact that Arabs and Kurds can work together on this is perhaps the brightest sign from all of this.

There is a long way to go on clearing out the insurgency as it scrambles from Anbar to Diyala and now faces the Anbar Salvation folks working with the Tribes in Diyala to set up the same. Militias from Baghdad have either headed north, into Diyala, or east towards Basra where they seek some shelter due to the militias there. But what is securing Baghdad and Anbar is Iraqis with Coalition forces and the Reconstruction Teams, along with the interim team members. Changing tactics and outlook and encouraging cooperation and self-governance has shown major and positive results in places even Saddam could not govern well, if at all, with all the blood on his hands.

That is, apparently, a lesson that Americans forget: it is harder to build than to destroy, especially in the face of those that only destroy.