As IF Times

link Fraud case targets grants awarded by President Obama’s friend – Chicago Sun-Times.

 When little Johnny or little Suzy are asked what they want to be when they grow up, it’s likely they will give the usual expected responses.  For boys, it’s policeman, fireman, doctor etc.  For girls, it may be nurse, teacher or lawyer.  For the really starry eyed, sports star or entertainment personality will also be options.  How quaint that sounds.  Kids these days have no idea where the big money is made.  The really precocious youngsters may aspire to be investment bankers or hedge fund managers, but nobody really knows what those jobs entail at that age.  Come to think of it, it’s not really clear to me what they do and I’m almost an adult.  According to MSN.com, the list of top 10 paying careers are as follows:

 But apparently, the really high paying jobs aren’t even on the radar for most kids.  Let’s take the example of Mr. Whittaker, the person mentioned in the linked article.  His job is “executive vice president for strategic affiliations and associate dean for community-based research” – a job which pays $670,833, at least in 2009.  Now in 2011, 3 years later with COLA it’s probably a few ticks higher.  Hey, inflation affects the rich too!  Why are the teachers of today not prepping their kids for these kinds of jobs?  What kind of schooling qualifies someone to be eligible for a nearly $700,000 a year public service job?  If you read the title of his job again, it says ” associate dean”.  I’m guessing the real dean gets paid a few ticks more. The President of the United States is paid a nominal $400,000 a year.  Of course that doesn’t include a modest expense account and living allowance.   But  a person who is an assistant dean for strategic affilliations makes almost 75% more than the President.

 Makes you wonder though, would it be possible to get someone to do this obviously important job for a slightly lower salary, say $500,000? or $400,000? Or perhaps even $200,000 without materially affecting the tasks at hand?  At some point, you’d have to think that many other competent people who are also experts in “strategic affiliations and community based research” would be eligible to fill the post, saving the taxpayers some serious dough.

 Ah, but the requisite item on their resume would have to include friendship with certain politicians.  For this reason, courses should be offered at all stages of children’s education to include “friendship of potential politicians” – how to identify them, how to maintain contact and how to capitalize on them.  Clearly, this has more bearing on earning potential than a genuine skill set.  Once you gain access to this circle of people, their future livelihoods are ensured.  They will not be subject to the vagaries of the business cycle nor of any supply and demand dynamics.  Once they are in the sufficiently connected circle, it’s only a matter of finding a bank large enough to hold their regular hefty deposits. 

 This is hardly a partisan observation since this dynamic has been going on since somebody invented the idea of government.   But in this time when there are those expressing the need to have fairness in the tax system, where the “rich” have to pay more in taxes to support the infrastructure to support the  less affluent, it’s a jarring affront to common sense.  On the other hand, if you follow the logic of those in office now, why not make everyone a high paid civil servant and then hit them all with a higher tax rate?  As usual, the elegantly simple solutions are the best.

link Cleaver: If Obama wasnt president, we would be ‘marching on the White House’ – The Hills Blog Briefing Room.

Apart from the racism that this sentiment represents, the truly astounding aspect of this announcement is the blatant stupidity and naivete.  It’s all but saying that policies coming out of the White House are horribly wrong and ineffective, especially to the Black community.  Hello! Rational people have been saying that for years and only now it’s become obvious? 

Barack Obama is the standard bearer for a number of constituencies which pushed him into the world’s highest office.  By liberals of course who were keen to demonstrate their willingness to embrace a non white candidate.   By youth because he was someone closer to their age than option B at the time.  By Latinos and other minorities because he represented a possible movement towards their sensibilities.  But especially by Blacks since he was one of their own and finally, some measures would be taken to address their issues of inequity in society.

It would be useful to look at history and note that some of the biggest human tragedies happened because of misplaced idealism granted to a member of that particular society.  By some counts the death of between 45 and 75 million Chinese by starvation during the Great Leap forward was orchestrated by…a Chinese, Mao Tse Tung, surely one of the biggest mass murderers in the history of man.   We’re not sure if those who died were pulling for the homey in Peking.  Josef Stalin didn’t care too much about the native blood since he was responsible for about 23,000,000 people’s death through starvation.  Kim Il Sung and his son Kim Jong Il haven’t exactly treated their own countrymen particularly well either, apparently disposing of  over 2 million of them over their terms in office.  During the terror reign of Idi Amin in Uganda, apart from being one of the 300,000 or so killed while he ran that country, you’d have a good chance of being eaten as well.

We could go on to list statesmen such as Saddam Hussein, Charles Taylor, Pol Pot and Ho Chi Min.   The point is, having a common racial heritage in all of these cases didn’t prevent people from being victimized in their own countries.  People who think that just because they happen to share a trait with someone in charge puts them on the insider’s list for favours are…well, they’re just dumb.  Would anyone ascribe any more trust to someone who was left handed just because they also happened to be a lefty? Or redheaded? Or bald? 

On the religious front, I’m sure lots of people happily absorbed all the earnest pleadings of James Bakker and Jimmy Swaggert before it was discovered that in fact they were the wolves among the lambs.  We know that Bernie Madoff was considered a mensch in the Jewish community until somebody asked for a cheque.  

The kind of identity politics being played out today ironically reduces the chances of anything being done which can benefit the most people.  Somebody will always feel aggrieved and the irrationality of their tribalism prevents the ability for society to move forward in a cohesive way.  It makes no sense to support someone who is unsupportable.   The bottom line is, if he’s a goof to you, he’s a goof to all.