The Conundrum
Perhaps the most unfortunate behavior characterizing human (as a general blanket statement) is predictability. Men often respond to high pressure decision-making with the same involuntary reaction they experience when getting an erection. What is the president you may ask yourself?
Take one of the single greatest economic driving forces in the world; as a matter of fact you can drill down and look no further than the New York Stock Exchange.
Throughout the day tickets fly, monitors flash, people scream on the floor waving pieces of paper, pencil or pen in hand and the most up to date have a portfolio of electronic networks from personal smart devices or tablets.
As the bell tolls the adrenaline continues to flow becoming the venom of ones soul, the ticker board rolls as pennies, quarters, fractions and dollars, forcing individuals to react to strategic moves that will create the greatest advantage for their clients or themselves.
Holding an internal database of positions that need to be executed, lest they suffer, to perfection. Scouring the floor, screens and monitors for immediate advantages.
The looser hold out for the deal they missed then in disbelief the wait and watch with piercing anticipation for the shoe to fall off the other foot; "but wait, that can't still be going up" they exclaim Shit! They saw the numbers yesterday and recognized the pattern of consecutive escalation in price, the buy was still there if they would only have bought at opening bell.
Decidedly they wait...and "No not another climb!" yep, triple digit increase. Their heart sinks as the number continue to go up on the buy-in, they missed out on.
Unable to bare the risk of a further missed opportunity and finally, after holding out nearly all day, just past lunch time and mid-day! They buy. Followed by a deep and nearly immediately plunge into the jackpot of failures abyss. They not only missed the numbers, the bought at the wrong time.
The bell rings and for the clean-up, they purchase, using what remaining assets they have to mop up potential earnings for the next day.
Showing posts with label wall street journal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wall street journal. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Monday, July 15, 2013
Victims and Vigilance Who is to Blame
This is just a surface analysis of the Trayvon Martin case. While it provides some detailed references and questions, it is by no means comprehensive. It is simply to state that each person with an opinion should do some research and think more critically about the circumstances surrounding this case. Arguments can be made for both sides; it is a troubling case that will be studied for years to come.
There is a troubling culture in the United States-- violence. From the outsiders perspective, the disparity in the level of imprisonment in the U.S. outweighs that of any developed nation. The United States not only has the most prisoners among any developed nation, the United States has the highest prison population in the world (2009 International Studies for Prison Studies) with over 2 million individuals incarcerated. So while we might not be able to compete for low wages in the functioning part of society, our prison population quite possibly offsets that factor through privatization of the prison systems. Is there something wrong with this association? Yes.
Who was following whom? Who was carrying a gun? Who ignored the police urging that he stay in his car? Who thought that the other was one of "them," someone about to get a away with something? (Southern Poverty Law Review)
Currently with the debate regarding George Zimmerman acquittal of murder and or/ manslaughter of Travyon Martin, United States is once again facing its shadow that prevails over its glory-- events which occurred on the night of February 26, 2012.
Despite the strong bias one might feel in this case, it is important to look more deeply at some facts and issues surrounding this case. It is the nature of humans especially in the U.S. to look only at what comes out in the news and other media sources; we also listen to public figureheads that are not quite as reliable as we would like them to be. In situations such as this it is important to delve more deeply into the matter to arrive at some deductions and conclusions that offer a more accurate and reliable data conclusion.
At first glance it can be troubling to see the results of this Travon/ Zimmerman case, but there are some important factors and legal aspects to consider to think more critically. So helpful at doing some surface analysis I considered the following:
Paul Barret of Business Weeks Politics and Policy laid out valid points regarding the case the first of which is that Zimmerman is guilty for pursuing his victim when he should have remained in his car as advised by law enforcement. Had Zimmerman remained in his vehicle, the fact is Trayvon Martin would likely still be alive.
Beyond that we must look at the law however fair or unfair it might appear. Issues that would come up causing a verdict against plaintiff would be adequate provocation; withdrawal, . Self defense is the easy low hanging fruit that we as observers would gnaw away at, but would our assessment be accurate? From a bias perspective it is easy to say that a man with a gun could not possibly be defending himself against a teenage boy with no weapon; however, one the act of violence is initiated several other factors come into consideration. Did the defendant attempt to remove himself from harm, or did Trayvon attempt to remove himself from harm recognizing that Zimmerman was drawing a weapon. Additionally did his actions (the defendant) have any other purpose? If Trayvon was intimidated (which is almost impossible to determine), he could easily have murdered Zimmerman if he felt his life were in jeopardy.
Drugs
THC levels and whatever amount of marijuana found in Martin's system or on his person are by no means rationale for mind altering responses.
The conversation Mr. Martin was having with his girlfriend moments before his death suggest that she was advising him to run, while simultaneously Zimmerman was speaking with police that Martin was on the run. These two pieces of information clearly have very differing perspectives on what was occurring. For Mr. Martin, he was being pursued and felt threatened by Zimmerman, immediate grounds for self defense, therefore Martin could have been vindicated in his response to Zimmerman approaching him. Attacking Zimmerman would be completely justified. While Zimmerman (a perceived assailant) was monitoring Martin's activity. Did Zimmerman have a right to stalk, Martin? Which would be Martin's perspective if he 1) understood the law and 2) was still alive.
These events surrounding Trayvon Martin should really force and encourage all citizens to look at the disparities rather than solely the event itself. If in fact Trayvon Martin killing should have been resulted in the conviction of Zimmerman's for manslaughter and second degree murder, but did not; we need to arrest our law; look at what revisions mandate change; and accommodate a more balanced system that is truly based on one's actions.
Under the law, Zimmerman should never have left his vehicle; the 911 operator should have given firm instructions for Zimmerman to remain in his vehicle rather than state that "...you don't need to do that..."; Fact, Zimmerman pulled a gun and a trigger, but that in itself is not a crime if you are "defending yourself" against a life threatening confrontation; and prejudice is not enough to convict someone of a murder. Yet, it is Zimmerman's perception that a threat was real, his belief that "those people always get away" that resulted in Trayvon Martin's death.
One thing is certain, taking one's life must be based on more than looking like a suspicious character. But at the same time we cannot overwhelmingly state, beyond a shadow of a doubt that George Zimmerman is guilty. It is difficult to reconcile this but it is something that should force us to assess the legal system which allows an individual to walk away with complete freedom after taking another persons life based on perception.
Condolences to the family as no persons child should leave this planet before their parents.
There is a troubling culture in the United States-- violence. From the outsiders perspective, the disparity in the level of imprisonment in the U.S. outweighs that of any developed nation. The United States not only has the most prisoners among any developed nation, the United States has the highest prison population in the world (2009 International Studies for Prison Studies) with over 2 million individuals incarcerated. So while we might not be able to compete for low wages in the functioning part of society, our prison population quite possibly offsets that factor through privatization of the prison systems. Is there something wrong with this association? Yes.
Who was following whom? Who was carrying a gun? Who ignored the police urging that he stay in his car? Who thought that the other was one of "them," someone about to get a away with something? (Southern Poverty Law Review)
Currently with the debate regarding George Zimmerman acquittal of murder and or/ manslaughter of Travyon Martin, United States is once again facing its shadow that prevails over its glory-- events which occurred on the night of February 26, 2012.
Despite the strong bias one might feel in this case, it is important to look more deeply at some facts and issues surrounding this case. It is the nature of humans especially in the U.S. to look only at what comes out in the news and other media sources; we also listen to public figureheads that are not quite as reliable as we would like them to be. In situations such as this it is important to delve more deeply into the matter to arrive at some deductions and conclusions that offer a more accurate and reliable data conclusion.
At first glance it can be troubling to see the results of this Travon/ Zimmerman case, but there are some important factors and legal aspects to consider to think more critically. So helpful at doing some surface analysis I considered the following:
- defining the terms of the accusations in the case
- understanding more about the case itself
- listening to the 911 call recordings
- considering the timing of events
- assessing the factors in the causes of action
- reviewing the explanation of the laws regarding manslaughter and second degree murder
Paul Barret of Business Weeks Politics and Policy laid out valid points regarding the case the first of which is that Zimmerman is guilty for pursuing his victim when he should have remained in his car as advised by law enforcement. Had Zimmerman remained in his vehicle, the fact is Trayvon Martin would likely still be alive.
- According to the Sentencing Project's website, the rate of incarceration for white Connecticut residents in 2005 was 211 per 100,000 people; for black residents it was 2,532 per 100,000.
Beyond that we must look at the law however fair or unfair it might appear. Issues that would come up causing a verdict against plaintiff would be adequate provocation; withdrawal, . Self defense is the easy low hanging fruit that we as observers would gnaw away at, but would our assessment be accurate? From a bias perspective it is easy to say that a man with a gun could not possibly be defending himself against a teenage boy with no weapon; however, one the act of violence is initiated several other factors come into consideration. Did the defendant attempt to remove himself from harm, or did Trayvon attempt to remove himself from harm recognizing that Zimmerman was drawing a weapon. Additionally did his actions (the defendant) have any other purpose? If Trayvon was intimidated (which is almost impossible to determine), he could easily have murdered Zimmerman if he felt his life were in jeopardy.
Murder requires unlawful killing with
"malice aforethought" (i.e., intent to kill, knowledge of death or
unreasonably high risk of injury will result / “depraved heart”, or intent to
commit a felony). While Zimmerman could be culpable based on his intention of following the victim; it is difficult to state that his intent, based on his conversation with the 911 operator, was to "kill or commit a felony". Under the "Substantial Step", penal code, Zimmermans decision to get out of his car and follow Martin, could be punishable by law if his intent was to commit a crime of murder. The challenge to this fact is that he called the police, an action an individual with criminal intent would not likely carry out, unless she/ he had planned out such a crime.
Actus reus and mens rea both come into play here (i.e. the physical portion of the crime and the mental portion of the crime). When Zimmerman got out of his vehicle we cannot with absolution determine that he made a mental decision to attack and kill Martin. His physical behavior was not aggressive nor was his mental behavior that of someone who intended to kill an individual as mentioned above, it is not likely that one would call the police while intending to commit the crime of murder (which would essential seal their fate).
What Does "...up to no good." Mean
There is much to be said however regarding Zimmerman's conversation with the 911 operator. For example the language "I think he is up to no good", followed by "these assholes, they always get away." suggest a turning point in Zimmerman's behavior, from observer, to stalker. Perhaps the prosecutors should have spent more time considering this angle. At this point he is making a conscious decision to exercise prejudice in his actions.
What were Zimmerman's Actions
Did Zimmerman use his gun to protect himself because of a perceived threat, or was he in control of his actions? Because so little is truly understood about Zimmerman's actions, we cannot say whether he lost control of his abilities regarding he being the attacker (initiating the conflict) or the victim (i.e. Martin initiated the attack). This makes this case more challenging. The autopsy should have revealed more in terms of the struggle itself.
Drugs
THC levels and whatever amount of marijuana found in Martin's system or on his person are by no means rationale for mind altering responses.
The 911 Recordings
If you listen to the 911 Operator recordings, you hear concerned residents calling (wikipedia files) in the event from where they stand, hear, and see, but you cannot conclusively say that the individual shouting for help is Trayvon Martin or Zimmerman, before hearing the assumed shot in the background. Again, none of the witnesses stated that they actually saw a gun, but we can draw certain conclusions and testimony and collected evidence answers the weapons possession issue. Law enforcement officers were also negligent for sending narcotics investigators rather than detectives to provide a more accurate assessment of the circumstances. This would clearly work in Zimmerman's favor.
The autopsy states that the gun was between 1-18 inches from Trayvon's chest. There is a significant difference in this research. One's actions at one 1 inch suggest a very different action that one's potential actions at 18 inches. At 18 inches, the opportunity to offer a warning from a pursuant are much more likely to deter that pursuant if you have a gun. At a range of one inch, it could be argued that there was a struggle and the firing of the gun was a result of that struggle.
The conversation Mr. Martin was having with his girlfriend moments before his death suggest that she was advising him to run, while simultaneously Zimmerman was speaking with police that Martin was on the run. These two pieces of information clearly have very differing perspectives on what was occurring. For Mr. Martin, he was being pursued and felt threatened by Zimmerman, immediate grounds for self defense, therefore Martin could have been vindicated in his response to Zimmerman approaching him. Attacking Zimmerman would be completely justified. While Zimmerman (a perceived assailant) was monitoring Martin's activity. Did Zimmerman have a right to stalk, Martin? Which would be Martin's perspective if he 1) understood the law and 2) was still alive.
These events surrounding Trayvon Martin should really force and encourage all citizens to look at the disparities rather than solely the event itself. If in fact Trayvon Martin killing should have been resulted in the conviction of Zimmerman's for manslaughter and second degree murder, but did not; we need to arrest our law; look at what revisions mandate change; and accommodate a more balanced system that is truly based on one's actions.
Under the law, Zimmerman should never have left his vehicle; the 911 operator should have given firm instructions for Zimmerman to remain in his vehicle rather than state that "...you don't need to do that..."; Fact, Zimmerman pulled a gun and a trigger, but that in itself is not a crime if you are "defending yourself" against a life threatening confrontation; and prejudice is not enough to convict someone of a murder. Yet, it is Zimmerman's perception that a threat was real, his belief that "those people always get away" that resulted in Trayvon Martin's death.
One thing is certain, taking one's life must be based on more than looking like a suspicious character. But at the same time we cannot overwhelmingly state, beyond a shadow of a doubt that George Zimmerman is guilty. It is difficult to reconcile this but it is something that should force us to assess the legal system which allows an individual to walk away with complete freedom after taking another persons life based on perception.
Condolences to the family as no persons child should leave this planet before their parents.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Networks and Economic Struggles?
Evidence of this hard to accept reality, hit home when someone very important in my life, informed me that they would be filing for bankruptcy. Sometimes the seemingly most unfortunate choices are the best choices, if in such a troubling predicament. But what has this to do with networks?
After speaking with this friend, she informed me that she went to the federal tax collection agency and stated that the very first question they asked was if she had any affiliation with any social network. Really! Since when is who I socialize with or what group I am connected with related to my reconciliation with my back taxes? As far as I am concerned federal agencies including our political leaders and revenue collection services could just as easily be investigated for malfeasance. Why? Simply because the wealthy are paying a smaller percentage of taxes than ever before. At one point in the U.S. the tax rate for the wealthy was nearly 90%. Today with tax loopholes and write-offs, the expense for the wealthy is significantly reduce. And they pay (at least in the U.S.) is 15% on capital gains. In contrast, more than 15% of the U.S. population is at or below the poverty level ((2010 U.S. Census), granted that our poverty level is still well above undeveloped nations).
Networks play an important role in our society. From Palestine to Libya, from Sudan to the United States, from Japan to the Caribbean; social networks help us learn more about what is happening in the world around us. Maintaining that privacy is critical to feeling a sense of security. Despite that exploitation of online organization like Facebook and others, networking gives us a sense of interconnectedness.
The fact that I can touch people in Estonia, Japan, Africa, the British Isles, and different parts of South America, from my blog indicates that technology is not really separating us (as was once thought with personal electronic musical devices and mobile telephones). I respect the confidentiality that my followers deserve, and expect to some degree- I would imagine. At the same time ( and I don't want to sway back and forth here) I understand the importance of security from violent acts, in any form; from groups that want to act out maliciously, to individuals who bring harm to innocent members of society. So monitoring is important. What do I hope for then and where do I stand?
With all of the challenges we face as individuals, it is important that we continue to monitory decisions that are affecting our lives- especially with the advent of so much political turmoil in effect. When chaos is in play, it is easy to look for answers from people who are purporting to be experts and leaders who are suppose to be performing on our behalf. This is in no way a request that there be any type of civil disorder, rather that we maintain a watchful eye on policy changes that circumvent the people process. There was an excellent piece on National Public Radio (npr[ a U.S. broadcast), about how susceptible we are to opinions, when we are seeking answers or disorder is present. Don't panic, do your research, and use your voice by being active in what actions by anyone (friends, politicians, or experts) influence your life. Doing so will help curtail the negative impact regulations have on open social networks.
ps happy birthday Jim Henson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)