Uncategorized

Error message

  • Deprecated function: The each() function is deprecated. This message will be suppressed on further calls in _menu_load_objects() (line 579 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/menu.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).

Team Wonkhe welcomes David Kernohan

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 13/06/2017 - 11:30pm in

Tags 

Uncategorized

I am delighted to announce that from this morning, David Kernohan will be joining Team Wonkhe as Associate Editor. David has supported and written for Wonkhe since our inception, both as a featured author and supporting analysis behind the scenes. Many in the sector will already be aware of him as one of the sector’s... read more

The post Team Wonkhe welcomes David Kernohan appeared first on Wonkhe.

Introducing Wonkfest: our biggest event yet

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 01/06/2017 - 8:00pm in

Tags 

Uncategorized

Today we are hugely excited to launch Wonkfest. More than twelve months in the making, Wonkfest is not just the biggest event we’ve ever produced, but the start of what we hope will become an annual tradition in the higher education sector: a policy jamboree – two solid days of serious policy debate, endlessly interesting... read more

The post Introducing Wonkfest: our biggest event yet appeared first on Wonkhe.

Wonkhe and HSBC launch new collaboration

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 01/06/2017 - 8:00pm in

Tags 

Uncategorized

Wonkhe and HSBC are delighted to announce an exciting new collaboration. Mark Leach, Wonkhe’s founder and Editor in Chief, said: “We are thrilled to be working with HSBC. As the world’s leading international trade and business bank, their global reach and deep relationships with UK universities make the bank an ideal partner.” The collaboration centres... read more

The post Wonkhe and HSBC launch new collaboration appeared first on Wonkhe.

Wonkhe and KPMG announce a new collaboration

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 15/05/2017 - 2:02am in

Tags 

Uncategorized

Wonkhe and KPMG are pleased to announce a new collaboration.

The post Wonkhe and KPMG announce a new collaboration appeared first on Wonkhe.

Does UK HE have a retention problem?

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 05/04/2017 - 8:39pm in

In the second of a series of events hosted jointly by Wonkhe and UPP Foundation, an expert panel considered the knotty retention in higher education on 23 March at King’s College London. The panel, chaired by UPP Foundation’s Richard Brabner, was: Alex Proudfoot, Chief Executive at Independent HE Ross Renton, Pro-Vice Chancellor Students at the... read more

The post Does UK HE have a retention problem? appeared first on Wonkhe.

When Did Hillary Lose the Election? In 1964.

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 14/01/2017 - 5:16am in

Tags 

Uncategorized

The half-century story of Democrats’ abdication and decline

By Steve Roth. Publisher, Evonomics

On January 1, 1964, John F. Kennedy posthumously initiated the half-century decline of the Democratic Party, beginning its descent into this moment’s dark and backward abysm of slime. His massive tax cuts for the rich, implemented in ’64 and ’65, were the turning point and beginning of Democrats’ five-decade abandonment of its longtime winning formula: full-throated, unabashed, progressive economic populism. It was the signal moment when Democrats began to abandon the working and middle class. The working and middle class, betrayed and feeling betrayed, have now returned the favor.

Unapologetic progressive economic populism — starting really with Teddy Roosevelt’s slash-and-burn trustbusting, and turned up full-throttle in his namesake’s New Deal — had given Democrats three decades of electoral success. FDR lost two states and eight electoral votes in 1936. He got 523 out of 531. Over four campaigns, he never got less that 432. Eisenhower got a couple of terms as a very moderate Republican, really a progressive, but Democrats’ dominance of Congress and state governments seemed eternal.

Because: that economic populism also delivered success for America. The New Deal, combined with the government deficit spending of World War II, resulted in the greatest burst of widespread growth, progress, prosperity, and individual economic freedom in American history — before or since.

James Carville was certainly right: “It’s the economy, stupid.”

Democrats’ remaining progressivism under Johnson — civil-rights legislation, Medicare and Medicaid, and the wholesale movement of liberated women into the workforce — eventually pushed a hot middle-out economy into the demand-driven inflation of the 70s. That torrid growth brought government debt down from 120% of GDP in 1947, to 35% in 1980. (You know what happened after that.)

But even amidst that burst of growth and sustainable government finance, Democrats were abandoning the very source of their economic and electoral success. Kennedy’s top-tier tax cuts were a preemptive, voluntary abdication to trickle-down theory, before “trickle-down” even existed. When Reagan turned that dial to eleven, he was only occupying ideological ground that Democrats had ceded and abandoned to the enemy, long before. It was an epochal own-goal of historic proportions.

Democrats have been kicking the economic ball into their own net ever since. The obvious solution to the 70s inflation was to raise taxes, reducing government deficit spending, to drain off excess demand from a too-hot economy. Instead they acceded to the banker-industrial complex and the diktats of childish monetarism, again conceding the win to an economic belief system that is egregiously self-serving for the rich, and anathema to Democratic progressive economic populism.

That’s when the enthusiastic, progressive Democratic base stopped turning out in force. (Exception: Obama. For other reasons.) Progressive baby boomers have spent their whole lives voting against Republicans and their swingeing, destructive economic policies, not for inspiring Democrats. Think about the Democratic presidential candidates since 1964. McGovern was a true social progressive, but really a one-issue anti-war candidate. Bill Clinton did okay, within the confines of the post-Reagan economic belief system, which he never seriously challenged as FDR did. Obama didn’t either, in rhetoric or practice. His administration’s failure to prosecute a single prominent bankster is arguably the best single explanation for Hillary’s electoral meltdown.

Can you name one full-throated economic progressive Democratic candidate in the past half century? I’m not even asking for fire-eating. Here’s some help: Humphrey. Carter. Mondale. Dukakis. Gore. Kerry. (Are you still awake?) Aside from Obama, no Democratic candidates had the Democratic base flocking to the polls. (Compare: Republicans and their rabid Tea-Party base.) Add Hillary to that rather stultifying list.

Starting in the 60s, Democratic candidates stopped delivering an inspiring economic message. But the real failure was substantive. In their sellout to the enrich-the-rich supply-siders, Democrats abandoned the working and middle class, and the party’s winning legacy of widespread prosperity. The Democratic party elite bought into and helped promulgate an economic belief system (the “Washington Consensus”) in which distribution and concentration of wealth and income not only don’t matter, they can’t matter. The quite predicable results are upon us — decades of working-class wage stagnation, and wealth concentrations that are as high or higher than any period in modern world history.

It’s no wonder the Democratic base feels betrayed. They were betrayed.

Still: despite those decades of weak-kneed collaborationism, Democrats have obviously remained more economically progressive than Republicans. Clinton and Obama managed to raise taxes some, and Obama gave us Obamacare. And the economy has shown the results. Democratic presidents have delivered growth, progress, widespread prosperity, individual economic security, and true personal economic “freedom” that Republicans — the self-proclaimed “party of growth” — can only imagine in their fever dreams.

By almost any economic measure — GDP or income growth, job creation, stock-market runups, deficit reduction, people in poverty…choose your measure — Democrats’ economic performance has unfailingly beggared what Republicans have offered up. That is true for any multi-decade period you choose to look at since World War II, or over the last century for that matter. It’s true at the national, state, and local levels. Republicans constantly promise prosperity and growth. Democrats consistently deliver it (at least compared to Republicans). They’ve kicked Republicans’ economic asses, decade after decade.

Bigger pie? Raise all boats? Talk to the Democrats.

But nobody seems to know that. Did you? And Democrats never even say it — much less repeat it endlessly over decades, shouting it from the rooftops to stir up the base as Republicans would. The old saw is apparently right: “A liberal is someone who won’t take their own side in an argument.”

Perhaps that failure is a result of progressives’ fussy squeamishness about people getting rich. They don’t really like that word. But voters do. A third of Americans’ think they’ll be rich someday. Fifty percent of 18–29-year-olds do. (About 5% of Americans actually are rich, with more than couple of million dollars in net worth.) That squeamishness explains the persistent “anti-capitalist” strain of American liberalism, which is such an electoral disaster at the voting booth.

Democrats have much to atone for in their failure to hold the line on progressive economic principles, their failure to wholeheartedly champion and defend the working and middle classes, their sellout and abdication to the bankster class. But they also have much to crow about. Instead, though, they’ve stood by for decades while Republicans have falsely claimed the “party of growth” moniker, contrary to all historical evidence.

It is the economy, stupid. Voters, Democratic and Republican alike, will tell you in surveys about all the things they care about. But when they walk into the voting booth, they’re going to choose the person who they think will make them, their families, and those around them more prosperous, comfortable, and economically secure. They vote for candidates who they think will deliver better lives — starting with people having enough money to pay the bills. The Republicans realized that forty-plus years ago, and they’ve been winning based on that ever since. “I’ll cut your taxes and deliver economic growth.” Full stop, drop the mic.

Trump showed us that fire-breathing populism wins elections. While his brimstone reeked of many things, economic populism was at the core of his rhetorical fur ball. Even as he prepared to betray the working class at unheard-of levels, he channeled that betrayal straight onto his vote tally. “Audacity”? Obama should grab a stool and go to school.

And Bernie showed us the same thing. His campaign was unprecedented in American political history, funding a full-boat national campaign and outspending Hillary by 25 million dollars, almost completely with small donations. His message of economic populism brought in more than 200 million dollars in donations from 2.5 million people. And he turned out the enthusiastic base, in droves. Presumably he would have done so on election day, as well. Are Democratic political operatives finally beginning to take note?

There is a path out of the wilderness for Democrats. It’s the path they’ve trod before, with huge success. It involves (for once) coalescing around a core message that resonates with all Americans, repeated endlessly over years and decades. “Equality” and “opportunity,” important as they are, are weak beer on the campaign trail. Most Americans change the channel.  Tell them what they want to hear:

“We make America rich.”

The double meaning is fully intended.

 

Related posts:

  1. Engineering a Permanent Democratic Majority
  2. Republican Strategy: “When you’re playing with house money, it makes sense to go all in on every hand.”
  3. Wow: Cooperation. Should Obama Get Credit?
  4. Pro-Growth Republicans III: Yeah, Right.
  5. Everything Sez: “Obama Landslide.” What Gives?

Windows 10 to Linux

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 04/07/2016 - 4:51pm in

Tags 

Uncategorized

There is a lot of noise at the moment about Microsoft’s new operating system called Windows 10. Without repeating all the details you can have a look, say here or here or here. The essence of the story is that Microsoft is making it very difficult to avoid the new operating system. The advice being given is to not install the upgrade – which is anything but easy, since Windows 7 is supported until 2020.

The reality is that staying with Windows 7 is only delaying the inevitable. There is no reason to believe that Mircosoft’s offering in 2020 will be any better at respecting your ownership and every reason to think it will be worse. If you are one of these people considering sticking with Windows 7 then you have only two choices:

  • swallow your pride and update (either today or sometime in the next 4 years); or
  • migrate off the platform. If you migrate then, in practice, that means Linux (since Apple has similar beliefs about who really owns your computer).

In my opinion, if you actually want to own your own computer, you have to install Linux.

New Book – Python for Kids for Dummies

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 11/09/2015 - 11:16am in

Tags 

Uncategorized

You may or may not know that I’ve been moonlighting with Python for a number of years now.  This year I have written a new book Python for Kids for Dummies and, as of this week, it’s available from Amazon:

When I was engaged to do the book it was only going to be released in the US. I’ve recently learnt that it will be available in Australia (and elsewhere I guess) as well.

It is set to be available in Australia in a week or two (as at 11 Sept) from places like:

Kinokuniya

Booktopia

Angus and Robertson

Robinsons (Melbourne)

QBD (Hello Banana Benders!)

and Dymocks (or so I’m told, but it’s not on their website. I’ve always found Dymocks’ website difficult) – update saw a copy in Dymocks today (20 Sept 2015)

God how I hate instructional videos

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 27/05/2015 - 4:33pm in

Tags 

Uncategorized

Youtube has done wonders for lots of people, but frankly, my reaction to the vast majority of videos is that they are largely or wholly content free.  Those cases where a visual demonstration actually assists are exceedingly slim (some digital illustration videos for example, but even those don’t necessarily show you what you want). Watching videos of ostensibly informative topics is an exercise in entertainment and almost always a waste of my time.  If you have a transcript at least you can jump around to see if it’s got the info you’re looking for. With videos even if you jump around, you’re still pulling down info at the rate they speak (ie slowly). Next time you watch a documentary count the average number of words spoken in a minute. It’s ridiculously low.

It’s something of a farce that for my CLE requirements I can listen to some 5 year out “senior associate” um and arr through some talk at a firm or do some facile online tutorial (are there other kinds?) and get an hour’s credit, but if I read an entire book by an expert in the area or research the cases myself I get exactly 0 points.

Make money invalidating patents

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 08/04/2015 - 3:50pm in

Tags 

Uncategorized

The WSJ has an interesting article about an investor who is funding claims to invalidate patents. The logic is that he shorts the stock. When the patent is invalidated, the stock plummets. He sells the stock – profit.  Hat tip: Andrew Wilson

Pages