David McElroy

With long faces and grim predictions, U.S. politicians from Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on down are starting to implement budget cuts to the U.S. military. Am I the only one who’s ecstatic about the first cuts and eager for more to come quickly?

Panetta warned last month that cuts would be “devastating” to the Pentagon. Republicans have solemnly warned against cuts that go beyond the relatively minor cuts that Congress agreed to in August. Officials of both parties warn that the defense needs of the country might suffer with the automatic cuts that are going into effect after the congressional “super committee” gave up on its effort to find other budget solutions.

The military is supposed to find $450 billion in additional cuts over a 10-year period. Does this mean we can’t invade countries such as Iraq anymore? Does it mean that if some military action is required — such as attacking terrorist training facilities in Afghanistan — that we can strike somewhere and then leave the country alone afterwards? Does it mean that we won’t be spending money to help overthrow various governments — such as Libya’s — so that one dictator can be replaced by another bad regime?

Does it mean we can shut down U.S. military bases in Europe — and let the Europeans defend themselves? Does it mean that we can bring the troops home and send many of them to productive jobs in the civilian world?

Keep Reading

As Christmas approaches, these guys are having to set aside their search for self-discovery, but this is what they do in the off-season. (Click this one for a bigger size.)

Keep Reading

When I started work as a newspaper reporter many years ago, I had to clock in and out every day if I expected to be paid. Just like many millions of people, I was paid for my time, not my output. I never understood why.

When I was a teen-ager and first started cutting lawns to make money, I quickly discovered that people wanted to pay me an hourly rate. I used to gently push for a different arrangement. I wanted a flat fee for the service, because I felt that the hourly rate punished me for working harder and faster. Sometimes my clients agreed, but many held out for an hourly rate, so I was stuck having to make sure I didn’t work too fast and thus cheat myself. I hated it.

The obsession with paying people for their time is a relic of the industrial age, when human labor was considered just another interchangeable part of an industrial machine. (The idea that any hour of labor should have the same worth as another hour of labor was also an important cornerstone of Karl Marx’s thought.) The idea might have made sense in an age when people were treated like gears in machines. It has no place in a world where brains are more valuable than brawn.

I came across software today that is something like a modern version of the time clock for people who work for companies from home or other locations. The software is called Odesk. It’s installed on your computer and it takes screenshots of whatever you’re doing at six times each hour. It records the movement of your mouse. It can even record keystrokes to figure out what you’re doing. If your six screenshots show work apparently taking place, you get paid. If one of your screenshots shows something other than work, you give up one-sixth of your hour’s pay.

Keep Reading