David Brooks, "Where Are the Jobs?": Look and You Will Find Them

David Brooks, in his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Where Are the Jobs?" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/07/opinion/brooks-where-are-the-jobs.html?_r=1&hp), would have us know that there has been significant innovation in information technology of the kind created by Steve Jobs, but this pace of innovation has not been matched in other sectors. Brooks writes:

"Let’s imagine that someone from the year 1970 miraculously traveled forward in time to today. You could show her one of the iPhones that Steve Jobs helped create, and she’d be thunderstruck. People back then imagined wireless communication (Dick Tracy, Star Trek), but they never imagined you could funnel an entire world’s worth of information through a pocket-sized device.

The time traveler would be vibrating with excitement. She’d want to know what other technological marvels had been invented in the past 41 years. She’d ask about space colonies on Mars, flying cars, superfast nuclear-powered airplanes, artificial organs. She’d want to know how doctors ended up curing cancer and senility.

You’d have to bring her down gently. We don’t have any of those things. Airplanes are pretty much the same now as they were then; so are cars, energy sources, appliances, houses and neighborhoods."

I have just returned from a lightning trip to New York and Toronto on behalf of a client, and in the course of my travels, there was indeed evidence of the stagnation referred to by Brooks. I flew in on a Boeing 747, an aircraft first flown commercially in 1970. Even more frustrating was my journey on the Long Island Railroad, which I have been riding since I was a boy, and which, to the best of my recollection, has changed little over the past 50 years.

However, my journey also served to illustrate why I don't agree with David. I had come to these cities to demonstrate the progress being made by a tiny Israeli company, Nano Retina (http://www.nano-retina.com/), which is creating a miniaturized artificial retinal device, which after a 30-minute minimally invasive procedure is expected to restore vision to many persons suffering from advanced macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy and retinitis pigmentosa. The leading ophthalmologists with whom we met, gazed at the chip with admiration, given that human clinical trials are already being planned for the first generation device, intended to immediately provide functional vision, in 2013.

Brooks goes on to say:

"The Green Revolution improved grain yields by 126 percent from 1950 to 1980, but yields have risen only by 47 percent in the decades since."

I would suggest that David examine the progress being made by Evogene (http://www.evogene.com/), which is using computational genomics technologies to attain plant trait improvement to address growing demands for food, feed and fuel.

Brooks adds:

"The big pharmaceutical companies have very few blockbuster drugs in the pipeline. They are slashing their research departments."

On the other hand, Compugen (http://www.cgen.com/), whose discovery efforts consist of in silico (by computer) hypothesis-driven drug product candidate prediction and selection, has a constantly growing list of promising drug candidates in their pipeline.

Brooks concludes:

"If you want to be the next Steve Jobs and end the innovation stagnation, maybe you should start in hip-hop."

Sorry, David, but as best I know, none of the visionaries and scientists at Nano Retina, Evogene or Compugen had their beginnings in hip-hop. Rather, the disruptive technologies that they are developing are being born from genius, discipline and perspiration.

[As noted in prior blog entries, I am a Compugen shareholder, this blog entry is not a recommendation to buy or sell Compugen shares, and in mid-September 2009 I began work as a part-time external consultant to Compugen. This blog entry has not been authorized or approved by Compugen.

I am a part-time external consultant to Nano Retina.

I am an Evogene shareholder, and this blog entry is not a recommendation to buy or sell Evogene shares. This blog entry has not been authorized or approved by Evogene.

The opinions expressed herein are mine and are based on publicly available information.]

Nicholas Kristof, "Is Israel Its Own Worst Enemy?": With Friends Like Kristof, Who Needs Enemies?

Rarely have I witnessed a more distorted, sickeningly myopic opinion piece than that written by Nicholas Kristof in today's New York Times, entitled "Is Israel Its Own Worst Enemy?" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/opinion/kristof-is-israel-its-own-worst-enemy.html?_r=1&hp). Kristof's begins:

"These days, the world has been turned upside down. Now it is Israel that is endangered most by its leaders and maximalist stance. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is isolating his country, and, to be blunt, his hard line on settlements seems like a national suicide policy."

Netanyahu stands in the way of peace? Let's have a look at Netanyahu's "maximalist stance" in his September 2011 speech to the UN:

"The settlements have to be -- it's an issue that has to be addressed and resolved in the course of negotiations.

. . . .

President Abbas, stop walking around this issue. Recognize the Jewish state, and make peace with us. In such a genuine peace, Israel is prepared to make painful compromises.

. . . .

Ladies and gentlemen, I continue to hope that President Abbas will be my partner in peace. I've worked hard to advance that peace. The day I came into office, I called for direct negotiations without preconditions. President Abbas didn't respond. I outlined a vision of peace of two states for two peoples. He still didn't respond. I removed hundreds of roadblocks and checkpoints, to ease freedom of movement in the Palestinian areas; this facilitated a fantastic growth in the Palestinian economy. But again -- no response. I took the unprecedented step of freezing new buildings in the settlements for 10 months. No prime minister did that before, ever. Once again -- you applaud, but there was no response. No response."

Netanyahu offered to meet with Abbas that same day at the UN. Abbas refused.

Earlier this month, Israel accepted the Quartet's proposal to resume peace talks (http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Israel-Accepts-Quartet-Proposal-to-Resume-Peace-Talks-130938678.html). Abbas refused.

Kristof would have us believe that future Israeli construction of 1,100 housing units in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo means that Israel now demands sovereignty over all of Jerusalem:

"With that diplomatic fight at the United Nations under way, Israel last week announced plans for 1,100 new housing units in a part of Jerusalem outside its pre-1967 borders. Instead of showing appreciation to President Obama, Mr. Netanyahu thumbed him in the eye.

O.K., I foresee a torrent of angry responses. I realize that many insist that Jerusalem must all belong to Israel in any peace deal anyway, so new settlements there don’t count. But, if that’s your position, then you can kiss any peace deal goodbye. Every negotiator knows the framework of a peace agreement — 1967 borders with land swaps, Jerusalem as the capital of both Israeli and Palestinian states, only a token right of return — and insistence on a completely Israeli Jerusalem simply means no peace agreement ever."

This is pure sophistry on Kristof's part. Every peace proposal proffered by former Israeli prime ministers Barak and Olmert to their counterparts Arafat and Abbas have been premised upon the 1967 lines with land swaps and a division of Jersualem, and, in the case of Olmert's proposal, with sharing of Jersualem's holy places. Although they refused these peace agreements, Arafat and Abbas never contested that the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo would remain with Israel. Nevertheless, Kristof would have us believe that future construction of 1,100 housing units in Gilo is the equivalent of Israeli annexation of all of Jerusalem. Sorry, Nicholas, but your claim amounts to scurrilous bunk.

Kristof continues:

"The Israel Defense Forces can deal with suicide bombers and rockets fired by Hezbollah. I’m not sure that they can defeat Palestinian women blocking roads to illegal settlements and willing to endure tear gas and clubbing — with videos promptly posted on YouTube."

Kristof, are you referring to those same Palestinian women who are repeatedly subjected to "honor killings" by their Palestinian male kin? Peculiar, how Kristof has avoided writing about this horrifying phenomena. Kristof's attempt to conjure up a picture of the IDF systematically clubbing Palestinian women is little less than a blood libel.

But wait, there's more. Kristof blames only Israel for a deterioration of relations with Turkey:

"Mr. Netanyahu has also undermined Israeli security by burning bridges with Israel’s most important friend in the region, Turkey."

No mention by Kristof of the increasingly radical Islamic stance adopted by Turkey's ruling AKP party and its attempts to curry favor with Iran and offer succor to the terrorist Hamas regime in Gaza. By the way, where is Kristof's story about Turkey's oppression of its significant Kurdish minority? Where is Kristof's story of Turkey's imprisonment of journalists? Where is Kristof's story of how Turkey's Prime Minister Erdogan accepted the Qaddafi 2011 Human Rights Prize, then refused to participate in NATO's operation to dislodge the Libyan tyrant.

Nicholas writes:

"If Jews in the West Bank can vote, then Palestinians there should be able to as well."

Peculiar, how Kristof fails to mention that Abbas insists that the future Palestinian state will be free of Jews ("judenrein")and that Abbas will never accept Israel as a Jewish state.

Kristof concludes:

"Today, Israel’s leaders sometimes seem to be that country’s worst enemies, and it’s an act of friendship to point that out."

Nicholas, with friends like you, who needs enemies.

Thomas Friedman, "How Did the Robot End Up With My Job?": Friedman Contradicts Himself

It was only a week ago that Tom Friedman, in a New York Times op-ed entitled "Help Wanted: Leadership" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/opinion/sunday/Friedman-help-wanted-leadership.html?_r=1), explained the measures, purportedly known to all, which are required to heal the current economic crisis:

"We know what to do — a Grand Bargain: short-term stimulus to ease us through this deleveraging process, debt restructuring in the housing market and long-term budget-cutting to put our fiscal house in order. None of this is easy and the economy will not be fixed overnight; it will take years. But there is every chance it will get healed if our two parties construct the Grand Bargain we need."

"We know what to do"? A "Grand Bargain"? As I observed this past Thursday (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2011/09/paul-krugman-phony-fear-factor-blame.html), remedying unemployment and curing our economic ills are anything but simple matters, owing to the effects of hi-tech:

"I believe that we have entered a new era in which computers, robotics, automation and information technology are responsible for an efficacy which has made many jobs redundant. I do not foresee future demand for unskilled labor. For that matter, I believe that even with respect to skilled labor, mediocrity will no longer suffice in the marketplace."

Lo and behold, in his New York Times op-ed of today's date, "How Did the Robot End Up With My Job?" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/opinion/sunday/friedman-how-did-the-robot-end-up-with-my-job.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss), Tom appears to have changed his tune:

"In the last decade, we have gone from a connected world (thanks to the end of the cold war, globalization and the Internet) to a hyperconnected world (thanks to those same forces expanding even faster). And it matters. The connected world was a challenge to blue-collar workers in the industrialized West. They had to compete with a bigger pool of cheap labor. The hyperconnected world is now a challenge to white-collar workers. They have to compete with a bigger pool of cheap geniuses — some of whom are people and some are now robots, microchips and software-guided machines."

Friedman concludes:

"Indeed, there is no 'in' or 'out' anymore. In the hyperconnected world, there is only 'good' 'better' and 'best,' and managers and entrepreneurs everywhere now have greater access than ever to the better and best people, robots and software everywhere. Obviously, this makes it more vital than ever that we have schools elevating and inspiring more of our young people into that better and best category, because even good might not cut it anymore and average is definitely over."

Yup, Tom's "Grand Bargain" isn't going to cut the mustard.

Friedman and I are now in agreement? "Not entirely," he replied with a sigh of relief. Regardless of whatever "elevating and inspiring" are achieved by US institutions of higher learning, the overwhelming majority of graduates are not destined for the categories of "good," "best" or "better." Most will be "average" given that such is the nature of the curve, and the value of that bachelor's degree may no longer be worth the paper it's printed on. College an expensive gamble? You bet! Welcome to our Brave New World.

Gail Collins, "The Curse of the Mitt": Seamus the Dog for the Twenty-Second Time

Over the course of several months, we were told that Gail Collins was busy writing a book and would not be attending to her bi-weekly New York Times op-ed column. Well, she's back, and in my opinion, she needs some more time away.

This past Wednesday, Gail published an op-ed entitled "Happy Tidings from the Hill" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/29/opinion/collins-happy-tidings-from-the-hill.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss), which, try as I might, I was unable to finish. I recall some meandering blather with references to "Willow the cat."

Today, Gail has blessed us with "The Curse of the Mitt" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/opinion/collins-the-curse-of-the-mitt.html?_r=1&hp), which I suppose is intended as a follow-up to a prior Collins gem labeled "Mitt! Mitt! Mitt!" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2011/04/gail-collinss-mitt-mitt-mitt-once-was.html).

Unlike "Happy Tidings from the Hill," I was able to read through "The Curse of the Mitt," but just barely. It consisted of a series of disconnected paragraphs explaining how Romney is overwhelming a currently underwhelming field of G.O.P. presidential candidates, questioning facetiously whether Romney has been responsible for the collapse of the Boston Red Sox this season, and warning Chris Christie to avoid the presidential race owing to Romney's peculiar powers. And yes, you guessed it, she couldn't help indulging her own personal obsession with yet another reference to the Seamus story:

"Is there a way to work the fact that [Romney] drove to Canada with the family dog strapped on the roof of the car into this story?"

Answer to Gail: Actually, no. My understanding is that this is the twentieth time Collins has referred to the story (see: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/sep/13/gail-collins/mitt-romney-and-dog-car-roof-one-columnists-obsess/).

Wait, I stand corrected -- this is the twenty-first time. In a September 23, 2011 op-ed entitled "Perry's Bad Night" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/24/opinion/perrys-bad-night.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss), i.e. just a week ago, Collins again wrote:

"For one thing, I don’t want to believe I live in a country that would seriously consider bestowing the nation’s highest office on a man who once drove to Canada with the family dog strapped to the roof of the car."

I'm sorry, hold the press! A FORA.tv video (http://video.answers.com/why-mitt-romney-will-not-be-president-517000725) has Collins, perched on the edge of her seat, recounting the story for a twenty-second time.

Sad.

Andrew Rosenthal will never allow me a guest column on the op-ed page of The New York Times. My views are not in keeping with the leftist editorial leanings of the ever more decrepit Gray Lady. However, as regards Gail, there is a whole world out there to write about, which extends far beyond Democrats and Republicans, and I am saddened to see how a column, which can impact many lives, is squandered from week to week.

"Chris Christie’s big problem": WAPO's Eugene Robinson Expresses Concern Over Chris Christie's Weight

In a Washington Post op-ed entitled "Chris Christie’s big problem" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/chris-christies-big-problem/2011/09/29/gIQAAL7J8K_story.html?hpid=z2), Eugene Robinson would have us believe that New Jersey's Chris Christie is not fit to serve as president:

"Chris Christie needs to find some way to lose weight. Like everyone else, elected officials perform best when they are in optimal health. Christie obviously is not."

The Democrats can't afford to lose New Jersey in 2012 (they never even seriously considered the possibility, see: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/09/30/us/politics/keys-to-victory.html), and they are obviously hitting the panic button. The Republicans might have a winner, albeit several pounds heavier than his optimal fighting weight.

Palestinian New Year's Greetings: More Rocket Fire

As Jews in Israel prepared for Rosh Hashana, Palestinians in Gaza made certain to send greetings across the border: Two Qassam rockets targeting civilians were fired into southern Israel on Tuesday, and a third rocket was fired into Israel on Thursday evening.

Do you remember what Palestinian President Abbas told a cheering UN General Assembly one week ago:

"The PLO and the Palestinian people adhere to the renouncement of violence and rejection and condemning of terrorism in all its forms."

Yeah, right.

Paul Krugman, "Phony Fear Factor": Blame the Republicans for Unemployment

In his New York Times op-ed "Phony Fear Factor" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/30/opinion/krugman-phony-fear-factor.html?_r=1&ref=opinion), Paul Krugman tells us that the fear of "costly regulations and higher taxes" is not responsible for the lack of hiring, as Republicans would have us believe, and that blaming the Obama administration for unemployment is unfair:

"Never mind the fact that the housing bubble, the debt explosion and the financial crisis took place on the watch of a conservative, free-market-praising president; it’s that Democrat in the White House now who gets the blame."

I'm not a Republican, and I don't blame Obama for weak job growth. I believe that we have entered a new era in which computers, robotics, automation and information technology are responsible for an efficacy which has made many jobs redundant. I do not foresee future demand for unskilled labor. For that matter, I believe that even with respect to skilled labor, mediocrity will no longer suffice in the marketplace.

Which is not to say that I don't blame Obama for the economic mess currently faced by the US. The US budget deficit will exceed $1 trillion in 2011 for the third straight year; prior to Obama, the deficit never exceeded $1 trillion. Moreover, during Obama's time in office, America has increased its debt by $4 trillion. Sorry, Paul, but with no economic recovery in sight, this is catastrophic. The sale of Plum Island and other odds and ends by the federal government for $22 billion (see: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44724162/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/#.ToVKl9QjKuI) is not going to make a dent in this shortfall.

For that matter, even Vice President Biden acknowledged on a Florida radio station on Thursday that the economy is now Obama's fault and not that of Bush (see: http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/09/29/biden-economy-our-fault-not-bush.html?obref=obnetwork).

Obama promised hope and change, but didn't deliver. In 2009, Obama signed the biggest economic stimulus plan in US history, and pledging to create or save 600,000 jobs, he declared, "Now we're in a position to really accelerate." Well now, in 2011, the president and Krugman are back to blaming Bush. I suppose this is the problem inherent in being a phony messiah.