What Are You Reading

[Harp]

"The Day of Battle" by Richard Atkinson.....

Atkinson's An Army at Dawn and The Guns at Last Light are also excellent.
He teaches at the War College, where Anton Myrer's novel, Once An Eagle was required reading, so these are probably board listed. :coffee:

 

[cw3pa]

"The Pickwick Papers" (1836) by Charles Dickens.

 

[scotrace]

Finally getting around to this. The Roosevelts are a much more fascinating family than the Kennedys, in my opinion.

No Ordinary Time, by Doris Kearns Goodwin.

http://www.amazon.com/No-Ordinary-Time-Franklin-Roosevelt/dp/0684804484/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1422811708&sr=8-1&keywords=No+Ordinary+Time

 

[HadleyH]

it's my IPOd here

it's the cosmos

interplanetary life

that's all I have been reading lately

Olga Romanoff bio is waiting on the shelf

what is one to do?

its all extraterrestial life from now on.. I know that in my heart
-------------

 

[HadleyH]

Olga Romanoff bio.... for a lil while....

then

intergalactic things....


and staying in other Galaxies for a long time....reading

 

[Harp]

then

intergalactic things....

Russian economics? (couldn't resist)

 

[LizzieMaine]

"Is American Radio Democratic?" by S. E. Frost. A 1937 University of Chicago study on how well the corporate/sponsor-driven "American system of Broadcasting" was representing the public interest, convenience, and necessity as then mandated by the Federal Communications Commission. The most interesting aspect of the book is the discussion of how and why broadcasting came to be regulated thru the establishment of the Fedral Radio Commission in 1926 -- broadcasters themselves pleaded with the Federal Government to step in and impose order on the utter chaos created by the it's-dough-let's-go/let-the-market-prevail attitude that existed priot to then.

 

[Fading Fast]

"Is American Radio Democratic?" by S. E. Frost. A 1937 University of Chicago study on how well the corporate/sponsor-driven "American system of Broadcasting" was representing the public interest, convenience, and necessity as then mandated by the Federal Communications Commission. The most interesting aspect of the book is the discussion of how and why broadcasting came to be regulated thru the establishment of the Fedral Radio Commission in 1926 -- broadcasters themselves pleaded with the Federal Government to step in and impose order on the utter chaos created by the it's-dough-let's-go/let-the-market-prevail attitude that existed priot to then.

One big fallacy that some make is to assume that business - especially businesses in competitive industries - don't like government regulation. Many of these businesses see it as a way out of crushing competition and a way to get the government to protect them from market risk and - look at utilities for example - as a way to get guaranteed investment returns. Crony Capitalism exists because the "Capitalists" want it.

My point is not to argue that government regulation or even government working in partnership with business is right or wrong as a blanket statement for society (I truly am to arguing one side or the other of that point), but to point out that many assume business hates regulation and loves competition, when that is not true all the time as many businesses use their government relationships to secure their market, profits, influence, etc.

Many free market philosophers rail against this cozy business-goverment relationship.

One recent examples that comes to mind is how taxi owners in NYC are trying to use government regulation to keep Uber out (not opining on if it is right or wrong, but the existing taxis are absolutely trying to get the government to keep Uber out)

 

[Harp]

"Is American Radio Democratic?" by S. E. Frost. A 1937 University of Chicago study on how well the corporate/sponsor-driven "American system of Broadcasting" was representing the public interest, convenience, and necessity as then mandated by the Federal Communications Commission.

Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, 63 S. Ct. 82, 87 L. Ed. 122 (1942) opens the possibility of the FCC
expanding its jurisdiction to include direct and tangential issues related to internet content and application,
not merely restrictive to infrastructure investment.

 

[LizzieMaine]

One big fallacy that some make is to assume that business - especially businesses in competitive industries - don't like government regulation. Many of these businesses see it as a way out of crushing competition and a way to get the government to protect them from market risk and - look at utilities for example - as a way to get guaranteed investment returns. Crony Capitalism exists because the "Capitalists" want it.

My point is not to argue that government regulation or even government working in partnership with business is right or wrong as a blanket statement for society (I truly am to arguing one side or the other of that point), but to point out that many assume business hates regulation and loves competition, when that is not true all the time as many businesses use their government relationships to secure their market, profits, influence, etc.

Many free market philosophers rail against this cozy business-goverment relationship.

One recent examples that comes to mind is how taxi owners in NYC are trying to use government regulation to keep Uber out (not opining on if it is right or wrong, but the existing taxis are absolutely trying to get the government to keep Uber out)

In the radio situation, it was simple -- there were too many broadcasters insisting on their right to broadcast on any frequency channel they chose, and at any power output they chose. The result was that radio, by 1926, was essentially unusable by the majority of listeners -- nearly everywhere you tuned on the dial was a cacaphony of heterodyne interference. Legitimate broadcasters who tried to respect each other's territory were drowned out by those who were only in it for the fast buck or to promote a personal agenda. Broadcasting had proven itself incapable of any form of self-regulation.

 

[jamespowers]

One big fallacy that some make is to assume that business - especially businesses in competitive industries - don't like government regulation. Many of these businesses see it as a way out of crushing competition and a way to get the government to protect them from market risk and - look at utilities for example - as a way to get guaranteed investment returns. Crony Capitalism exists because the "Capitalists" want it.

My point is not to argue that government regulation or even government working in partnership with business is right or wrong as a blanket statement for society (I truly am to arguing one side or the other of that point), but to point out that many assume business hates regulation and loves competition, when that is not true all the time as many businesses use their government relationships to secure their market, profits, influence, etc.

Many free market philosophers rail against this cozy business-goverment relationship.

One recent examples that comes to mind is how taxi owners in NYC are trying to use government regulation to keep Uber out (not opining on if it is right or wrong, but the existing taxis are absolutely trying to get the government to keep Uber out)

I see it happen all the time in business. Big business use government to push out any competition through its numerous powers. They either make the cost of entry into the business too high due to regulations and fees or they use government power to pursue their competitors through the IRS, OSHA or a host of the other alphabet organizations. The Big Three pulled a few of those on Tucker.
Big business loves government. It is small business----the little guy who hates government because they can’t pay to play.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

I see it happen all the time in business. Big business use government to push out any competition through its numerous powers. They either make the cost of entry into the business too high due to regulations and fees or they use government power to pursue their competitors through the IRS, OSHA or a host of the other alphabet organizations. The Big Three pulled a few of those on Tucker.
Big business loves government. It is small business----the little guy who hates government because they can’t pay to play.

Boys and Girls, can you say Unfunded Mandate? :eusa_doh:

 

[Harp]

Newton's Gift by David Berlinski

 

[LizzieMaine]

"From Jehovah to Jazz: Music in America from Psalmody to the Present Day," a study of American musical history by Helen L. Kaufman, published in 1937. Mrs. Kaufman writes in a sort of overstuffed middle-class ladies-discussion-club style, and was no doubt a devotee of Dr. Damrosch's "Musical Appreciation Hour," but she also admits that the recently-deceased Mr. Gershwin was one of America's true musical geniuses.

The most interesting aspect of the book, though, is her paralell discussions of the development of the metropolitan symphony orchestras in the late 19th Century on one hand, and the rise of the minstrel show -- the seedbed of American popular music -- on the other. "The same audiences listened to both," she points out, "and the wise composter took heed of both."

 

[Retro Spectator]

The New American Bible, and Rediscover Catholicism.

 

[Harp]

Morning train commute read, A Reply to Professor Hasen, Lawrence Lessig, Harv L. Rev. F.61

A liberal's penumbra conundrum via erroneous perception of First Amendment Law and Madison's Federalist #52 essay.

 

[RBH]

Tom Mix and Pancho Villa by Clifford Irving.

A hell of a fun read so far!

 

[HadleyH]

oh yes








yes ..."Chariots of the Gods" by Erich Von Daniken

ok ok from 1968...but still.verrrry intersting!

 

[Hercule]

"and the wise composter took heed of both."

Now THAT'S an interesting typo (I assume)! Knowing a thing or two about music from that era, I can assure your there was plenty of music on both sides of that fence worthy of composting.

 

[Mystic]

With three days of cold , damp, windy days expected. Looking around on the bookshelf for something I hadn't read in a while. I found a book I didn't know I had and have no idea when I got it.

"Unbroken" by Laura Hillenbrand, author of "Seabiscuit".

I thoroughly enjoyed "Seabiscuit". So far I see the same talent for putting details and meticulous facts in an enjoyable engrossing real life story.

If you haven't heard of the book or movie. It's about the experiences of Louis Zamperini, Olympic runner and WW2 POW.

I would recommend this book to everyone regardless of their reading preferences.