When one paraphrases the end of the Declaration of Independence as part of the blog’s tagline, one earns an automatic consideration to be added to the overstuffed roll. When one makes sense, like Ben Froland, I’ll add it gladly, even if it takes beating me over the head to remember to do so.
No Runny Eggs
The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.
Archive for September 27th, 2010
New NRE poll – What should be the new NRE logo?
A while back, I blegged for some help with a new logo. A couple of people stepped up and delivered what I consider ass-kicking logos. Here’s where I need your help in helping me decide which one.
First up, a design from J. Gravelle from The Daily Scoff:
Next up, a design from Mr. Tastic from Neo-Con* Tastic:
What should be the new logo of NRE?
Up to 1 answer(s) was/were allowed
- J. Gravelle's design (65%, 13 Vote(s))
- Mr. Tastic's design (20%, 4 Vote(s))
- J. Gravelle's design with Mr. Tastic's camo background (10%, 2 Vote(s))
- Mr. Tastic's design with no background (10%, 2 Vote(s))
- Keep the current non-logo (10%, 2 Vote(s))
Total Voters: 23
Loading ...I can’t promise to abide by the vote if it’s either close or sparsely voted upon, but the best way to make sure I do so is to vote for your favorite and get your friends to do the same. I’ll leave this up until the wee hours of October 13th, so you have some time to get them in line.
One side note – sorry to disappoint those of you who wanted the fedora as my Twitter icon, but the nuke is staying for a while thanks to Matt Kenseth self-destructing yesterday.
Revisions/extensions (3:27 pm 9/27/2010) –You’re not dealing with the Milwaukee Election Commission, the Government “Accountability” Board, or Chicago election officials here. I’ve already had to wipe out 4 “votes” that came from somebody who had already voted. No, I won’t tell you how I know the system was gamed.
PolitiCrap: Sullivan’s Claims (load one)
The team found Jim Sullivan’s claims about his record so full of it, we’re recommending courtesy flushes. The first load:
“I have worked tirelessly to grow our local economy, bring new jobs and industries to the region, ease our tax burden,”
Fact: in 2007 Jim Sullivan voted for the largest state tax increase in U.S. History when he cast a yes vote for SB40S Vote Sequence 102:, the Senate version of the state budget.
Fact: SB40S included a $15 billion tax increase to fund Healthy Wisconsin, a government run health care program that would have meant an average of $510 in higher taxes for every Wisconsin worker.
Wall Street Journal. July 24, 2007Fact: Healthy Wisconsin would have increased payroll taxes on employers by $1,000 per employee.
Wall Street Journal. July 24, 2007Fact: Healthy Wisconsin would have put Wisconsin’s budget $4.79 billion further in debt.
Wisconsin Policy Research Institute. June, 2008. Vol 21, 4
This is just me talking, but we really need something stronger than “Total Crap” for stuff like this.
Comments Off on PolitiCrap: Sullivan’s Claims (load one)
PolitiCrap: Barrett’s Jobs
I know, I should have put this up when it went up over the weekend, but I was trying to enjoy a fall weekend here in Wisconsin. Aaron Rodridguez of The Hispanic Conservative took on Tom Barrett’s claims that he revitalized the Menomonee River valley:
Overall, what was Mayor Barrett’s role in developing the Menomonee Valley? Well, by the time Barrett came on the scene, most of the modern real estate had already been developed. However, Barrett’s campaign ad touts his role in bringing Ingeteam, Helios USA, Talgo, and Republic Airways Holdings to the Valley. So let’s look at these.
*Ingeteam received $1.66 million in clean-tech manufacturing tax credits from the federal government to build wind turbine generators in Milwaukee. Ingeteam followed the money and Governor Doyle took the credit.
*Helios USA received $1 million from the federal government to invest in green technology in Milwaukee and the Milwaukee Economic Development Corp. (a private firm) supported Helios USA with a $500,000 loan to build a 40,000 square-ft factory. The funding to make it happen did not involve Mayor Barrett.
*Talgo came to Wisconsin because the federal government awarded us $823 million in stimulus funds to build a Milwaukee to Madison high speed rail line, $12 million to improve service between Chicago and Milwaukee, and $1 million on a route between Wisconsin and the Twin Cities. Without a federal subsidy of $835 million, Talgo wouldn’t have considered the move. Antonio Perez, Talgo’s CEO, said the reasons for choosing Milwaukee were based on economic conditions, logistics, cost of living, training facilities in the area, and an available work force – none of which has anything to do with Barrett.
*Republic Airways received a sizable carrot of $27 million in state income and payroll tax credits through 2021. It was a considerable incentive, but the deal-clincher was that Republic Airways already owned hangar space in Milwaukee, which beats renting one in Colorado for $2 million a year.
Comments Off on PolitiCrap: Barrett’s Jobs
Google/Verizon “Net Neutrality” agreement – pros and cons
Recently, Google and Verizon made an agreement-in-principle on what forms of new regulation on internet service providers they were willing to and unwilling to accept. The summary from Google’s and Verizon’s CEOs sound completely high-minded, but as always, the potential devils are in the details. Let’s take a quick look at each of the key elements:
- Consumer protections – The key word here is “lawful”. I’m leery of overextending this provision as just about any activity, including activity that continuously maxes out the contractually-available bandwith like, say, hosting a web server or watching YouTube videos 24/7, can be on either side of that line. Businesses that self-host web servers do pay a premium for consistent access to said server.
- Non-discrimination requirement –The first part, preventing undue discrimination of traffic causing harm to competition, is indeed a worthy goal. A non-binding presumption against prioritization of network traffic is a wee bit inconsistent with another item in the proposal allowing for prioritization of network traffic (which I’ll deal with in a bit).
- Transparency –To put it simply, clarity is good.
- Network management –Take it from someone who has been at conferences where there has simply been too much traffic for the available wi-fi – this tool is absolutely, positively necessary for ISPs. Indeed, one of the tools allowed is a by-general-class prioritization of network traffic.
- Additional online services –As long as the ISP delivers its contractually-obligated speeds for the general internet, all the more power to it if it also uses the network for a faster product. Of course, the way this is written, The Mouse might not be too happy because it would make the current execution of ESPN3.com illegal.
- Wireless broadband –I’m shocked, SHOCKED to see that business partners Google and Verizon Wireless don’t want most of these new regulations on wireless broadband, and most-specifically the non-discrimination requirement.
- Case-by-case enforcement –I like the idea of limiting the FCC’s role to enforcing the law, and the encouragement of third-party resolution processes.
- Regulatory authority –If I’m reading that portion correctly, it establishes a very bright line of what the FCC can (ISPs) and cannot (content and software) regulate, and what other regulatory authorities cannot (ISPs) regulate. As someone who is wary of what some of those pushing for “neutrality” see “neutrality” as, I really like the idea of keeping the FCC out of the content-regulation business.
- Broadband access for Americans –What is this doing in here? Seriously, why do ISPs have to bear the burden of making sure content is usable by those with disabilities? Shouldn’t that be left to the makers of consumer hardware that connects to the Internet?
On balance, the agreement could be a bit better, but leaving it solely in the hands of government would almost certainly make things a whole lot worse.
Comments Off on Google/Verizon “Net Neutrality” agreement – pros and cons
Say good-bye to AirTran (and “hub” status at Mitchell)
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that Southwest will, pending regulatory approval, buy AirTran for $1.4 billion. While most people believe (well, hope) this means more flights out of Milwaukee, I have an alternate take.
AirTran currently has 47 daily departures out of its “second national hub” to, ultimately, only 3 “non-stop/first-stop” destinations not served by Southwest out of its Chicago Midway hub-in-all-but-name on a “non-stop/first-stop” basis in its roughly-210 daily departures – Atlanta (which is directly serviced by AirTran out of Mitchell 4 times daily and AirTran out of Midway 8 times daily), Washington-Reagan National (directly serviced by AirTran out of Mitchell 3 times daily – Southwest directly services “nearby” Baltimore/Washington International out of Mitchell 3 times daily out of 10 total departures from Mitchell, and out of Midway 7 times daily, and “nearby” Washington-Dulles out of Midway 6 times daily), Dallas/Fort Worth (directly serviced twice daily by AirTran; Southwest requires at least 1 stop between Midway and Dallas-Love Field). During the winter, AirTran does offer a daily non-stop flight to Sarasota from Mitchell.
Even though Midway is severely limited in the types of aircraft it can service because it is on a completely-landlocked one square mile plot of land, it is just large enough to service the Boeing 737s that make up Southwest’s fleet and just under half AirTran’s fleet and the Boeing 717s that make up the other part of AirTran’s fleet. Southwest already had the majority of gates at Midway; with the takeover of AirTran, the only non-Southwest service at Midway will be Delta service to their hubs in Atlanta, Minneapolis and Detroit (the latter 2 using contracted regional airlines), Frontier service to their hub in Denver, Porter Airline turboprop service to Toronto (their hub), and not-yet-launched service by Branson AirExpress to their hub in Branson, Missouri. Something tells me that, instead of a combined 57 departures, or even 47 that AirTran has now, the new Southwest/AirTran will have something far closer to the 10 departures the current Southwest has now.
Comments Off on Say good-bye to AirTran (and “hub” status at Mitchell)
[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]
