It's ironic that the Democratic Party has become the party of American wealth; the blue states that voted for the Heinz Heir John Kerry in 2004 were and remain the wealthiest American states.

No, I don't think it's ironic at all. The blue states are where the most white collar jobs are located. Hence they attract people of a more intellectual bent and who are therefore more likely to question those currently in power. They are also less extreme in their religious views. So, it makes perfect sense. That the wealthier states are blue is more of a by-product of the current state of affairs, not the other way around.

Look at the top tier of the Democratic Political cabal, how moneyed they all are.

Well, look at the top tier of the Republican party. Is it any different? Maybe the difference is *how* they got their money. Seems like most of the current administration got their money somehow through oil, whereas the leading Democrats got their money in more varied ways. Don't get me wrong, I sincerely dislike the fact that only the wealthy can become president (in practice, if not in law). But, I would much rather the wealth come from something like ketchup than from oil (that is now destroying the world).

Perhaps human rights in the USA isn't the problem, it's human rights in Latin America

Yes, human rights in Latin America is a problem, but so it is here (albeit to a lesser extent). By simply criminalizing the undocumented workers, you are making things worse, but by making it easier for some to get a temporary work permit and then clamping down on the rest may make things much better in all respects.

Consumption is an issue...

Yes, it is, and it's probably even bigger than the whole immigration issue.

ps- Welcome back Andrew

Kevin,

I fail to see how what you're suggesting is fundamentally different from simply offering voluntary overtime to all employees at an increased rate. The only difference that I can see is that whereas you are suggesting that some employees only work at overtime wages, I am suggesting that all employees can work at overtime wages if they choose to and there is work available (which this is pretty standard at many companies).

If that's the case, then it seems unlikely that they would ever implement that solution, since they don't offer overtime at all to my knowledge.

As opposed to what you're suggesting, the key point is that what Walmart is trying to do is not voluntary, and I share Charles Fishman's concerns in that.

I assume that Tom was being ironic when discussing the bureaucracy of the Canadian health care system, but I'm going to respond anyway.

From my point of view, it's simple. Whenever I have a cold or any minor ailment, I just walk into a walk-in clinic, flash them my card, wait 15 minutes and I can see a doctor. No forms to fill out at all.

Compare that to when I was in the states and walk-ins like that are extremely difficult to do, cost money (co-payment even if you're insured), and then there are hundreds of forms.

My doctor friends up here complain about paperwork, but always say it's nothing compared to down south.

I pay $54/month for healthcare, but I got a waiver for this when I was a poor student, but it's worth it.

I read David Carr's Labrador quote and column in a different way. It seems to me that he was saying that the practice of writing a blog is like the Labrador ("friendly, fun, not all that bright, but constantly demanding your attention"), not the blogs themselves.

This is why Carr was writing about spending all his time tweaking and moderating his blog rather than writing columns. I imagine (I don't have a blog myself) that writing a blog, compared to writing a column in a world-class print newspaper, is much more relaxing. There is no editor you have to please. The feedback is almost instantaneous, and the readers can be sycophantic (which sounds like a yellow Labrador to me).

I, too, am tired of the blogs vs. MSM battle. They serve different purposes, each needs the other, and readers need both.

So, why don't you get back to what you do best, Andrew, and reinvent the notion of globalisation? David Carr can go back to talking about the academy awards. And we can all decide who we should read.

My understanding is that compulsory licensing in the music industry was originally meant to be geared towards helping artists (not recording companies or CD makers) make a profit despite pirating. Maybe that's too naive and idealistic of me to ever think that the world works that way.

That being said, it seems weird to me that practices that were once legal are no longer so now that CD-R prices have dropped and so has demand.

I tend to root for the little guy, but I'm not willing to do that here without knowing more.

And, besides, who uses that last millennium's technology anyway? I've had a package of 50 CD-Rs sitting right next to my computer untouched for over a year.