Since it is, unfortunately, timely, here’s another item about how seriously Waffle House takes disaster preparedness.
I’m planning to eat at my local Waffle House soon, just to show that I support their approach.
My Update this month is about something a little different: a recent Arizona Supreme Court opinion on the law of cattle brands. The specific question was whether or not the location of the brand on the animal is a characteristic of the brand for purposes of determining whether or not it is identical to another brand. The short answer, logically enough, is no.
To get the whole story, go to deconcinimcdonald.com and click on the publications tab, or just click on this link.
As I said in the Update, I expect that decision to be of interest to my clients and friends in the cattle industry. If you’d like to comment, just click the link below.
I STILL DON’T UNDERSTAND BITCOIN, BUT WHAT HAPPENED TO VENEZUELA ISN’T THAT HARD TO FIGURE OUT
Here’s an item that combines two topics I have been following: Bitcoin mining (whatever that is) is a way to survive during the economic meltdown in Venezuela. I’m not sure I know why, but I do know this: bitcoin good (I think), Venezuela economic meltdown bad.
AN OLD SCAM THAT KEEPS COMING BACK
A recent item on the Tucson News Now web site describes another instance of an old, and widespread, scam. Someone (a scammer) sends you a check for more than you expected. They tell you to deposit the check in your account and send them back the difference. By the time your bank tells you that the scammer’s check is no good, the scammer has cashed the check you sent back to them. This scam usually depends on the scammer’s check looking genuine enough to fool you, but even if the check looks perfectly genuine, that doesn’t mean it’s not fake, or from a closed or nonexistent account or bank, etc. Even cashier’s checks can be fake.
I have said it before: stop for just a moment and ask yourself if what the other person is asking you to do makes sense. If not, don’t do it until you have verified that it’s legit.
SHOULD THE TOWN OF SURPRISE HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON WHERE IN-N-OUT LOCATES ITS NEW RESTAURANT?
Or to put it another way, who knows better where the restaurant will succeed: the owners of the restaurant, or elected officials? I know, the elected officials have concerns other than whether or not the restaurant succeeds. But if that’s the case, then why do their comments (at least, as reported by the Arizona Republic) make it sound like they are only concerned with identifying the location where the restaurant is most likely to be a success?
I have written about this before. The methods used by large enterprises to select locations for their outlets are very sophisticated. Armchair quarterbacking by elected officials is unlikely to be helpful.
ANOTHER PIGOUVIAN TAX?
It sounds like the taxpayers aren’t convinced that the taxers’ motives are pure.
I have written previously about the ultimate folly of this type of taxation.
MORE ENTERTAINMENT FROM ALICE
I saw this Alice Cooper quote over at Ace's and just have to share it:
I call it treason against rock 'n' roll because rock is the antithesis of politics. Rock should never be in bed with politics. ... When I was a kid and my parents started talking about politics, I'd run to my room and put on the Rolling Stones as loud as I could. So when I see all these rock stars up there talking politics, it makes me sick. .... If you're listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you're a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons. We sleep all day, we play music at night and very rarely do we sit around reading the Washington Journal.
Now it’s Instapundit saying, in a column posted at USA Today, that automation is going to replace lawyers. The only concrete example he mentions, however, other than citing a book by another law professor, is a web site that I already pointed out has little potential impact.
He may well be right that automation will make legal information available to people who couldn’t get it otherwise. Far be it from me to question the logic of the Instapundit, but I can’t help asking: if automation is mostly going to benefit people who can’t afford lawyers now, how is that going to hurt lawyers?
The minister of transportation of India has declared that his country won’t allow self-driving cars. Because jobs?
It has come to light that the state of New York has a law that requires drivers to have at least one hand on the steering wheel. It sounds like something that was adopted to prevent the introduction of self-driving cars (see above), but it actually dates from the 1960s.
The contents of this blog, this web site, and any writings by me that are linked here, are all my personal commentary. None of it is intended to be legal advice for your situation.