동아일보 송평인 논설위원이 대통령 직속 ‘대한민국 임시정부 100주년 기념사업추진위원회’가 임정을 모욕하는 행위를 하고 있다고 비판했다.
송 논설위원은 또 한국프레스센터 앞에서 열리고 있는 ‘3·1운동 및 대한민국 임시정부 언론전시회’에 대해서도 문제점을 지적했다. 무정부주의자 신채호가 임정이 수립된 해인 1919년 창간한 ‘신대한(新大韓)’ 1, 2, 3호가 눈에 가장 잘 띄는 곳에 자리 잡고 있다는 것이다. 신채호의 이 잡지는 임정에 대한 비판을 넘어 임정을 폐지하려 했고, 집요한 공격에 결국 국민대표회의가 소집되고 창조파, 개조파, 임정수호파로 나뉘어 싸우게 된다. 이후 김구가 국민대표회의를 해산시켜 임정을 간신히 유지했으나 이후 임정은 명맥만 유지하는 신세로 전락했다.
송 위원은 “여운형과 박헌영이 해방정국에서 임정의 적대자였다면 해방 이전 임정의 적대자는 신채호와 김원봉이었다”고 말했다. 김원봉은 1930년대 김구가 윤봉길 의거 이후 일본 경찰에 쫓겨 상하이를 떠나 유랑하는 사이 조선민족혁명당이란 이름으로 연합세력을 구축해 김구로부터 임정을 탈취하려 했던 인물이다. 그는 “영화 ‘암살’에서 김구와 김원봉이 반갑게 만나는 장면은 거짓이다. 충칭에서 두 세력은 임정의 지원자인 장제스(蔣介石) 때문에 어쩔 수 없이 합작했지만 거주지까지 수십 리 떨어져 살 정도로 앙숙이었다”라고 말했다.
송 위원은 임정 100주년 기념사업의 이런 문제점을 지적하며 “임정 100주년이 임정을 지킨 사람들을 기리는 것이 아니라 임정을 없애거나 말아먹으려 한 사람들을 기리고 있으니 이런 자가당착(自家撞着)이 없다. 굳이 신채호 김원봉 여운형을 기리고 싶다면 임정은 진즉 폐기됐어야 했는데 잘못 살아남아 해방 이후의 역사를 망쳤다고 먼저 말하는 것이 솔직한 태도다”라고 꼬집었다. (조갑제닷컴 발췌)
----------------------------------------------------------------
미 의회는 중국 군부와의 협력 사업을 불법화 해야 한다.
중국이 미국의 제3의 국경이라 할 수 있는 카리브 해까지
진출했다.
---------------------------------------------------------------
트럼프는 김정은보다 문죄인을 다루는데 더 많은 시간을 써야 한다. 그는 국내에서는 민주제를 짓밟고, 해외에서는 김정은은 도우면서 미국을 배신하고 있다.
---------------------------------------------------------------
'공주보 철거 반대' 정진석 의원, MBC의 'PD수첩'을 치다! / 조갑제
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[외신번역] 문재인을 겨냥한 '트럼프의 최후통첩': 미국 해안경비대 함정의 한반도 파견/ 김필재 티비
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
대답할 수 없는 커다란 질문
시진핑은 부자이면서 동시에 공산주의자가 되고 싶어한다. 과연 그게 가능할까?
--->명확하게 답변할 수 있다. 시진핑이 진지하게 공산주의자가 되려 한다면, 중국은 서서히 가난한 과거로 회귀할 것이다. 하지만 말로만 사회주의를 하고, 실제로는 자본주의를 실천한다면 그런대로 현재의 부를 유지할 수 있다.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
쿠블라이 칸이 내려준 마패
"나는 칸의 사절이다. 나에게 대항하는 자에게는 죽음이 있을 것이다."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
자치통감을 쓴 사마광의 말인데, 마치 요즘의 자유주의자와 유사한 생각이다. 국민에 간섭하지 말고 스스로 부자가 되게 놓아두라는 말이다.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
황태순TV] 환경 꼴통 문재인, 괴담 생산 기지!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"사회는 순수하고 유일하게 연속적인 일련의 교환일 뿐이다."
기업가들은 국민의 심장이고, 그들의 자본은 그 피이다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
정치가들의 책임이다.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5천5백만 광년이나 떨어진 다른 은하에 있는 블랙홀을 찍은 사진이라는 얘기.
Humans used the most powerful radio telescopes they could get their hands on and pointed it towards a BLACK HOLE in ANOTHER GALAXY that is 55 MILLION LIGHT YEARS AWAY and 5 petabytes later turned it into a PHOTO. OF A BLACK HOLE. Get a grip internet.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
굿이어가 타이어를 발명하게 된 간단한 내력. 자식 6명이 죽는 동안에도 계속해서 고무를 이용해 무엇인가를 발명하려다 감옥까지 갔고, 그 안에서 우연하게 고무가 스토브에 떨어져 딱딱하게 되었는데, 여기에서 힌트를 얻어 타이어를 만들게 되었다고 한다.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What Explains the Resistance to Evolutionary Psychology?
written by Alex Mackiel
Recently, psychologist Michael Reichert, wrote an opinion piece for the New York Times suggesting that boy’s “tendency towards violence isn’t innate.” He writes, “Boys don’t come into the world with some inborn tendency toward domination or violence” rather, “violence springs from what boys learn about what it means to be a man.”
Additionally, the notion that there are sex differences in brain structure has also been coming under fire. A recent article in the Guardian refers to comments made about sex differences in brains by neuroscientist Gina Rippon. The article says, “Are there any significant differences based on sex alone? The answer, she says, is no. To suggest otherwise is ‘neurofoolishness.’”
However, the idea that there are sex differences in brains is well-established in the scientific literature. Indeed, it has recently been corroborated by a large-scale study published in Nature that found sex differences in gray matter volume in many regions of the adult brain.2 Moreover, a recent study published in Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience found evidence for sex differences in brain functional connectivity in utero and therefore presumably before socialization could possibly have been at play. (출처 퀼렛, 발췌)
---------------------------------------------------------------
너무 돈이 많은 자신의 죄에 대해
사면부를 얻으려는 댈리오의 제스처.
댈리오가 쓴 글은 한 마디로 엉터리다.
Ray Dalio's Hollow Lament
Jeff Deist
Hedge fund titan Ray Dalio is just the latest billionaire to call for government to save us from guys like him.
It's not pretty. Dalio's recent article titled "Why and How Capitalism Needs to be Reformed" is a mess, though to be clear it's a thoroughly well-intentioned and heartfelt mess. It's a mix of self-effacement (I'm just a lucky guy with good parents who went to good public schools!), dubious statistics concerning the non-problems of wealth and income inequality, and utterly unoriginal, counterproductive proposals for government action. But approving journalists can't get enough of it, or him, because nothing beats a billionaire's mea culpa for capitalism. So Dalio, fantastically rich and successful at age 69, finds himself a media darling on financial talk shows after a recent kickoff appearance on CBS's 60 Minutes.
The article, in two parts, is fairly long. It spends several pages discussing the author's own background, wage and income inequality, bad schools, lack of child care, lack of health care, and a host of other standard left-liberal complaints. But we can summarize Dalio's bottom line, as he does in a section called "What I Think Should be Done." It's an exercise in bland, meaningless jargon and lack of specifics:
Leadership from the top. People with their "hands on the levers of power" (yikes!) need to make inequality a priority. Obviously he means politicians and corporate leaders, and does not intend to lessen the "power" of either. But if bad politicians and greedy corporate types got us into this mess, how will they get us out? More importantly, and left unaddressed, is any suggestion of their incentives to do so. After all, the present system made them rich, powerful, and unaccountable.
Bipartisan policy makers working together to "divide and increase the economic pie better." More politics, which doesn't work and can't work. Whose policy? What makes a policy good? Why hasn't this supposed policy consensus already emerged on its own?
Clear metrics and accountability for the "people in charge." This doesn't work, and can't work, in politics. We have centuries of "data" to show how the worst rise to the top of the political world. Government by definition acts outsider the market, and is unaccountable by its very nature as a monopoly. Politicians don't have a P& L; private businesses do. Again, why does Dalio seem so oblivious to incentives?
Redistribution of resources. This doesn't work and can't work, except by market processes. Taxes. regulations, economic intervention, and state ownership of industry always reduce total wealth in society. A total nonstarter of a tired and thoroughly debunked idea, especially considering we already have a heavily interventionist economy. We also have the entire history of 20th century collectivism to demonstrate why "third way" interventionism can lead to outright socialism.
Many billionaires—Mr. Dalio, Warren Buffett, and Bill Gates among them— like to call for higher taxes on people such as themselves. But this raises a compelling question: would they have become rich in the first place under the kind of tax system they now advocate? Would they have accumulated a critical mass of investment capital if taxes had consumed more of their profits along the way? Would they have been able to maintain sufficient capital expenditures in their respective businesses to stay dynamic? Or would revenue, capital, and personal wealth lost to the IRS have relegated these super achievers to the status of merely successful?
Well-heeled tax hikers never mention the diminishing marginal utility of money. A billionaire could lose 90% of his/her wealth to the state and remain an elite centimillionaire. Higher taxes for billionaires are simply a cost of doing business, like paying 20% more for an acquisition. But for a "rich" American family making $200,000, or even $40,000 by global standards, a 20% higher tax bill might prevent them from ever reaching their own critical mass of savings and wealth. Just as dominant corporations welcome new regulations, financial elites welcome new taxes as a form of protecting their status from upstarts.
Furthermore, there is no indication Mr. Dalio or other wealthy advocates for wealth redistribution ever practiced this idea in their own businesses. Dalio voluntarily could have paid higher taxes, much higher taxes, both to the federal government and his home state of Connecticut. He could have argued for higher capital gains tax rates, and refused to accept "carried interest" treatment of his firm's income for management services. After all, to paraphrase Warren Buffett, why should Dalio's secretary pay a higher tax rate than him?
He also could have equalized pay and ownership among his employees, and hired low-income and low skilled victims of the bad public schools he identifies. He could have run his hedge fund as an employee-owned cooperative. He could have opened his funds to ordinary people with $500 or $1000 to invest.
Perhaps most of all, he could have called for the Federal Reserve to end its practice of keeping interest rates artificially low. Cheap money and credit are the lifeblood of hedge funds, making it possible to buy companies with less equity and more debt—less skin in the game. Leveraged acquisitions allow for fewer shareholders receiving (nondeductible) dividends, along with the tax benefits of deductible interest payments. Cheap leverage made Mr. Dalio billionaire he is today.
But low interest rates cause tremendous harm to average people who simply want to save money in simple, low-risk vehicles, and they distort the entire economy by producing malinvestment, encouraging consumption over saving, and rewarding high time preference. While Dalio admits the Fed favors rich guys by crafting policy that inflates asset prices instead of wages, he remains blind to the central bank's role as the primary driver of the wealth inequality he laments.
Mr. Dalio is by all accounts a brilliant and hard-nosed businessman. Hedge funds, at least successful hedge funds, make money by ruthlessly identifying untapped value in organizations, replacing board members and management with fund executives, and selling when the selling is good. So why on earth would he pledge to donate $100 million to Connecticut public schools, a system he admits is failing? Would he invest in a company with a similar track record of spending more and more each year for worse results? A company where he would have no say in management, board governance, operations, or how it spends his investment? Will he maximize, or even measure, the "return" on his investment in Connecticut public schools? Will he seek to minimize risk, in the form of his $100 million being irretrievably wasted?
The answer to these question is "No", because he's not buying a company or making a financial investment. He's buying goodwill, a form of insurance for billionaires against the growing tide of populist resentment. The infamous Reverend Bacon from Tom Wolfe's Bonfire of the Vanities comes to mind: Dalio is buying "steam control," and he's getting "value for money" as Bacon puts it. He's buying relief, an indulgence for his sin of getting too rich.
Dalio played the game, by the rules of the game. Now he appears to say, "I've got mine, let's change the rules."
Jeff Deist is president of the Mises Institute
-------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기