United States has World’s Fastest Computer

On By southwerkIn Uncategorized

The Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s high-performance Jaguar XT5 computer, built by Seattle-based Cray Inc., was named Monday as the fastest on the planet in the latest semiannual TOP500 list of the world’s most powerful supercomputers.

After a $19.9 million upgrade funded with federal economic stimulus money, Jaguar posted a performance speed of 1.759 petaflops or quadrillions of calculations per second.

It is often said that the government can do nothing right. As thinking human being we must recognize that broad generalizations may be true at one time or another but examining case by case is the best way to ascertain the truth. A government financed project in concert with a private company created the fastest computer in the world. Its purpose is research, one funded by the government.

There is a great deal of hostility to science in this country, hostility not based on fact but on rumor, lies and religious dogmatism. An ethical human being questions beliefs and decides to support or not support them based on his own decision making. Accepting a religious denomination’s directives on any belief without examination is an abdication of a human being’s responsibility to use the ability to reason.

Hostility to science can have long term effects on education and development in this nation. But far more dangerous is the implication that faith is utterly superior to reason. If thinking is not respected, there will be a temptation to choose leaders “just like us.” Instead of seeking capability, we seek comfort, because after all if reason, knowledge and education are not important why consider them a factor in decision making?

Suffer the Little Children to Starve

On By southwerkIn Uncategorized

Business Ethics is a subject deeply concerned with a variety of moral approaches to problems. Often dogmatic simple solutions are not effective all the time. The United States is said to be one of the countries in which the free market is enshrined as a “successful” doctrine. Successful it may well be in some contexts but one size does not fit all and there are problems resistant to the free market.

Last year, nearly 50 million American had trouble getting enough to eat. The Washington Post then says that one in four children in America is part of this group. That’s right, the richest nation on earth, richer beyond the ambition of countless empires of history can’t feed its population. This nation has 269 billionaires. Yet, 1/6 of the population has problems getting enough to eat. More than 35 million Americans get food stamps. More than thirty million children get government subsidized school lunches.

We can do better than this. We have a responsibility to make sure every American gets enough to eat. Yes, that includes the homeless and the “unworthy.” It might be said that if we encourage people to succeed in the free market they will solve their hunger problems through hard work and ambition. It has long been an ambition of mine to see new born babes fight their way into important corporate positions. I want to see eight and nine year olds compete with adults in a difficult job market. That will make them tough.

Well, don’t worry about them, the free market cures all. We just have to give it time.

The record is unmistakable: If you seek economic growth, social justice and human dignity, the free-market system is the way to go. It would be a terrible mistake to allow a few months of crisis to undermine 60 years of success. The Wall Street Journal

If human dignity is not to have enough to eat.

So how should one respond to issues such as severe poverty, hunger, and healthcare? I would suggest that it comes down to education, education, and more education. An individual must educate him or herself first and then educate others. Ayn Rand’s philosophy holds that historical trends are the inescapable product of philosophy. Fighting for the victory of ideas can defeat widely held ideologies that threaten liberty, private property rights, economic and individual freedom. From the BLOG, Free Market Physician
If we educate people, they won’t be hungry. (Damn those children. They just won’t get a college education until they get older. Apparently they lack ambition.)


All of us are the inheritors of this freeing of the market and the resulting technological revolution. The automobiles people drive, the televisions they watch, the movies they see, the cell phones they answer, the planes they fly, and — exemplified by Microsoft — the computers they use, all owe their development and availability to the free market. At a more basic level, we can best see the operation of the free market in the availability of an amazing variety of cheap foods for the poor and lower middle class. An American supermarket is a cornucopia of agricultural wealth, with choices of fruits, vegetables, meats, cereals, breads, wines, and so on from many areas of the United States and countries of the world. Similarly, department and hardware stores shelve, hang, and display a wide variety of goods. To see the results of freedom, you need only shop in any of democracy’s stores.  On The Incredible Utopia That is the Free Market, R.J. Rummel

There isn’t any hunger. We live in Utopia. Isn’t it wonderful?

Letter to Boozman: In Defense of E-mail Privacy

On By southwerkIn Uncategorized1 Comment

Sent November 3rd, 2009.

Judge Michael Mosman wrote in a decision for the United States District Court (District of Oregon) that e-mails do not deserve 4th Amendments protections.

http://volokh.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Mosman.pdf

I don’t like this. My e-mails are in my mind just like letters in the mail or private conversations on the phone. Can’t we have legislation to overrule this ridiculous court decision?
Do you feel that the fourth amendment doesn’t apply in these cases? Does my privacy and the privacy of millions of Americans stop once we type on a keyboard but not on paper?

James Alan Pilant, J.D.

eBanks Seek to Derail Bills to Curb Overdraft Fees

On By southwerkIn Uncategorized

This article is good reading. The banks are working to stop the reform of this notorious practice. I commented on the article:

There is little doubt that Ms. Feddis and most other banking officials went to the best business schools and all of them had Business Ethics as a required course. What effect did it have when they can set a money trap like this? There is no doubt that banks deserve a fee for an overdraft but this is not a fee, it is a harvest of money from the unwary. When did ethics become optional? And more importantly, how can anyone say this is a legitimate means of business profit with a straight face. jp

This is the article’s address, below.

http://industry.bnet.com/financial-services/10004616/banks-seek-to-derail-bills-to-curb-overdraft-fees/#comments

I received a comment from the author of the article. This is it:

Alain Sherter

11/03/09 |

RE: Banks Seek to Derail Bills to Curb Overdraft Fees

Southwerk–I’ve posed that very question to lots of
people who know more about the banking industry
than I’ll ever know. The answer about precisely
when ethics flew out the window may differ, but
one thing is consistent–it wasn’t always thus.

But somewhere along the line (the ’70s, by my
rough estimation) banks started to change. Certain
ideas started to sprout that changed the business.
The prime directive became profit, not prudence.
And enormous forces were brought to bear on bank
executives to pursue profit no matter the cost–to
consumers, communities and even the banks
themselves.

To be clear, this isn’t to denigrate the profit motive.
It’s only to recognize that certain core values and
ideals shape how businesses operate. And when
those change, mountains move.

If there’s a silver lining, it’s the fact that things were
different once. That suggests the financial industry
can change once more.

Can Corporate Mistakes Kill You?

On By southwerkIn Uncategorized

ABC is covering the story of Fairbanks Farms meat recall. It appears two people may have died from eating meat contaminated with e-coli. Whether or not there was misconduct and none has been claimed at that time, this is a clear example of company whose products could kill or injure thousands of people.

Another important lesson here (particularly for my Business Law students) is that one company can produce products under many labels. Fairbanks sold it meat products under the following labels:

B.J.’s Wholesale Club/Burris, Trader Joe’s, ACME, Shaw’s Supermarkets Inc., Price Chopper, Giant Food Stores and Ford Brothers.

E-coli contamination chiefly kills the elderly and the very young. Its symptoms mimic the flu. It is very likely that many more Americans have been killed by e-coli than official numbers indicate.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/beef-recall-ecoli-contamination-fear-prompts-ground-beef/story?id=8970713

Does Cargill Use Derivatives To Help Small Business Or To Gamble On The Market?

On By southwerkIn business ethics

Does Cargill Use Derivatives To Help Small Business Or To Gamble On The Market?

 

In testimony before Congress, Jon Hixson of Cargill portrayed his company’s use of derivative as an aid to small business. (I provide a link to the full testimony below.)

Testimony Before the House Committee on Financial Services On Reform of the Over-the-Counter Derivative Market: Limiting Risk and Ensuring Fairness

“We offer customized hedges to help bakeries manage price volatility of their flour so that their retail prices for baked goods can be as stable as possible for consumers and grocery stores,” he told the committee’s wagging heads. “We offer customized hedges to help a restaurant chain maintain stable prices on their chicken so that the company can offer consistent prices and value for their retail customers when selling chicken sandwiches.”

Cargill earned 525 million dollars in the first quarter of this year. The total company is valued at 6 billion dollars according to its SEC filing.

Thus, we have clear evidence that derivatives are beneficial to Cargill. But when you read the testimony there is an absence of any numbers pointing to benefit for any of these small businesses. In fact, we are essentially asked to simply believe Cargill’s point of view.

I prefer numbers and verifiable evidence.

Derivatives are controversial because the use of derivatives during the 2007 economic crisis has been catastrophic destroying many financial institutions and were instrumental in creating the continuing economic difficulties.

It might be wiser to forego the use of derivatives for safer financial instruments. While derivatives may aid small business, they are also risky instruments. Do these different rationales conflict? Yes. Are there other choices? I am sure that in the multitude of financial instruments being sold today, there are other options.

I do have one question not addressed in the testimony, “In these transactions, who bears the risk of loss, Cargill or the small businesses?” I have seen that Goldman Sachs when using derivatives charged the investors with purchasing insurance to make sure the company suffered no loss. Is this the case here?

James Pilant

Too Many Business Ethical Failures

On By southwerkIn Capitalism

!!@@#dddddd444hmlbr35Too Many Business Ethical Failures

When I was eighteen I remember watching an interview with Art Buchwald, the great political humorist. He was asked if he had difficulty finding material to write about each week. He laughed and said that during the Watergate scandal his columns wrote themselves. He said writing under the Ford administration was much tougher. There wasn’t a scandal a day.

When I want to write about a business failing what I believe are its duties, it takes about a minute of internet searching. A particularly juicy one takes about five minutes. There is far more than I can write about. This ought to please me in some small way but it doesnt. This is a tidal wave of misconduct.

I teach Business Ethics. Have I got a chance against a tidal wave of misconduct? When confronted by a stubborn business culture that refuses to follow the dictates of conscience, religion or the public interest, do I just drown? What’s my answer?

You fight. What’s right is right and that you may very well not prevail is not the first consideration. The first consideration is whether or not you are doing what is right in the eyes of God and man. So, I fight.

James Pilant

Islam’s Business Teachings

On By southwerkIn Capitalism1 Comment

hmlbr09Islam’s Business Teachings

There are many negative stereotypes about Islam in the United States. Many foolishly belief that Islam is the same everywhere. Like Christianity, Islam has many branches.

I want to call your attention, gentle reader, to the ethical teachings of Islam in regard to business practices. Islam has particular teachings about the ethics of business. It provides guidance to its members in the business community.

Quoting from a Washington Post article:

But Islam has its own detailed system of business ethics, including a ban on interest-bearing loans and stocks and aversions to debt, hording and overvaluing. And it is becoming more of an issue as Muslims’ affluence and interest in business grows — something visible in classes such as the Fairfax Institute’s and in the appearance of Islam-friendly mutual funds and establishment of Islamic finance programs at universities such as Rice in Houston and James Madison in Harrisonburg, Va.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/06/AR2006050600747.html

Consumers Losing Faith in Business

On By southwerkIn Uncategorized

The article itself from BNET is a little self paroding talking about Business as the engine of recovery that people ought to look up to and respect but worries that it will take time to regain that respect. You think! This is what happens when business ethics disappear in the search for greater profits. This is what happens when the next quarter’s profits are the only measure of success and not what kind of people we are.

For many people talking about business ethics is just a brief joke, something whose existence is as likely as the Easter bunny. We can do better. No longer can business ethics be taught as a search for ways to avoid public relations problems but a search for what is good and right in all men in all ages.

From the article: Pay is part of the problem but the discontent goes wider. Four out of five people don’t trust business leaders to put the needs of staff or shareholders above their personal interests, according to Edelman’s Trust Barometer. A similar proportion think business ethics have deteriorated.

For years the workers and middle class have been the targets of bad legislation and exploitation by increased costs from banks, internet providers, and health insurance. A vulture culture devoted to worshiping the predator is not conducive to business ethics. It is conducive to lip service and a superficial appearance of compliance with the values of society. This is a great country with an amazing history of accomplishment. We can do better.

http://blogs.bnet.co.uk/sterling-performance/2009/10/29/why-nobody-trusts-business-anymore/

Tom Petters – 3.5 billion not small change

On By southwerkIn Capitalism

109-1Tom Petters – 3.5 billion not small change

Generally speaking few people begin a life of crime suddenly and without warning. Usually there are many small crimes and a certain “casualness” toward the accepted standards of society.

Tom Petters’ trial in Minnesota on hedge fund fraud (Ponzi scheme) begins this week.

Let me quote from the Wall Street Journal article:

In high school in Minnesota, he started a business selling stereo equipment to students at a local university, but his parents shut him down after learning he was skipping school. He later dropped out of college to work for an electronic retailer, but he was so broke in 1988 that he had to move in with his brother, Jon.

Add in a divorce, a stint in cocaine rehab, and involvement in multiple breach-of-contract lawsuits with business partners, both as a defendant and plaintiff.

There were plenty of warnings if someone was willing to look. Am I saying that people cannot turn their lives around? Certainly not. But I don’t believe in living with your eyes closed either. 

James Pilant

http://industry.bnet.com/financial-services/10004501/tom-petters-goes-to-trial-in-historys-second-largest-hedge-fund-ponzi-scheme/

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/04/22/tom-petters-and-the-alleged-dvd-fraud/