The Fanchtastic Blog

Praying

2011-06-15T12:16:00.000-07:00

What does it mean to be inside or outside a person? If we keep our emotions bottled up, we should seek therapy, open up, release our pent up feelings. What could possibly demarcate the boundary between that which is contained or pent up and that which is released? Disclosure to another. We disclose our feelings to release our feelings. Why such reliance on others? Without others, there is no release. Socialization is a prerequisite condition of healthy living. If disclosure perhaps represents some admirable higher self-awareness, then we shall admire it. But, the locus of disclosure need not be the other! Prayer is perhaps a close approximation of self-disclosure, only then with an alternatively feigned or genuine belief that the true platform of disclosure is some providential Higher Platform that you most certainly cannot understand. This imagined wireless connection with God disillusions the faithful, by placating them with the idea that their disclosure is indeed social. The release takes place. Amen. Prayer is self-disclosure masquerading as real socialization. A true palliative for a true man of God.

Delusions on China

2010-08-20T09:02:00.001-07:00

In June, China agreed to lessen control over the exchange rate value of the Renminbi in part due to pressure from the United States amidst concerns over the burgeoning trade deficit. American economists and politicians (including Obama) have postulated that China purposefully suppresses the value of their currency in order to stimulate exports by making them comparatively cheaper in overseas markets. Thus, when China allows the Renminbi to appreciate without exchange rate intervention, Chinese goods in America will be costlier relative to domestically produced goods. Americans will buy more US goods and less Chinese goods. This will purportedly assuage the growing import-export gap between China and the United States, and also stimulate domestic consumption within China. Currently, the ratio of domestic private consumption (spending by private citizens) to GDP is less than half of that in the US. China's exploding economic growth is comprised mostly of government spending, state-owned enterprises, and export growth. "Common" knowledge amongst economists is that spurring domestic consumption in China will lead to drastic increases in quality of life for Chinese citizens and instill stability in China's continuing economic growth, which needs to maintain annual gains of 8% simply to keep pace with the increasing population. Pressuring China into allowing their currency to appreciate, then, is a high priority in America.

However, this analysis, that Chinese currency revaluation is key to US and Chinese economic stability, unfortunately reflects a crass understanding of their economy. A recent WSJ op-ed, "Bashing Beijing Will Not Help Our Trade Deficit," argues that "the value of the yuan is not the main driver of the U.S. trade deficit. The wages and social safety net of Chinese workers are more important." This is on the right track, but the belief that increased wages for Chinese citizens are tenable is a pipe dream. China remains, more than most contemporary Sinologists are willing to admit, a largely state-run economy. Wage growth will come exclusively at the will of Beijing bureaucrats, not from the idealism and hopefulness of US policy-makers. To charge that we simply must increase wages in China to solve the U.S. trade deficit is akin to asserting that we should just start providing more healthcare to North Koreans in order to improve their quality of life. It's a wonderful aspiration, but pragmatically unattainable.

Pozen writes in the op-ed that "if wages rise in China, its workers would have more money to spend." And, "if wages go up in China, then the prices of its exports will rise." So, Pozen, a senior lecturer at Harvard business school, has solved all our problems: "[American politicians] should support higher wages and a stronger safety net for Chinese workers. These measures would not only help reduce the U.S. trade deficit but also would be consistent with recent efforts of China's officials to improve the living standard of its workers." And we thought cold-blooded capitalists lacked that twinkling idealism. This grand conclusion to his piece begs a question I would've hoped WSJ's editors would've demanded an answer to within the incomplete musings of the article: How do we support higher wages and a stronger safety net for Chinese workers? Perhaps a spirited letter writing campaign to Hu Jintao will do the trick.

Under the Clinton administration, we attempted to "support Chinese workers" by demanding wage increases, strengthened workers' rights, and crackdowns on human rights abuses as precursors to our approving China's admission to the WTO. Ultimately, though, we agreed to forego annual evaluations of our trading relationship with China, relinquish bargaining power over human rights abuses, and adopted China as a permanent trading partner. This gave China free reign over the US economy, as we substantially reduced tariffs and allowed Chinese companies, fueled by low-wage, indentured servitude cost advantages, to flood the US market with abundant, inexpensive goods.

Unfortunately, this favor wasn't reciprocated. US companies wishing to enter the Chinese market face stringent controls over how their business can be operated. China's most effective means of exerting influence over American companies in China is selective enforcement of the law. The way in which Chinese business law is written means that, essentially, in order to do business in China, a company will be violating a whole host of regulations. Companies that follow the Beijing dictums find themselves free from enforcement of China's amorphous blob of business regulations. However, when Beijing is displeased with a company, they swoop in with a variety of fines and punitive measures. China even went so far as to arrest four Australian executives working in Beijing. When US and Chinese values clash, American companies wishing to remain in the Chinese marketplace must placate China. In China, American companies operate entirely within the confines of the interests of Beijing.

For example, Cisco "is the worldwide leader in networking that transforms how people connect, communicate and collaborate." How did they make their money in China? By designing and implementing the firewalls that restrict Chinese citizens' access to information, censor dissidents, and provide Beijing with the intelligence to find and make disappear those who disagree with the party line. Many internet writers and bloggers in China have found themselves placed under house arrest, banned from the Internet, and detained for years without charges.

American banks also face severe restrictions. Most are allowed only one or two branches in the country. And, there are only two foreign-owned ATMs in China. 85% of Chinese citizens don't have access to credit cards. Most have no access to mortgages or other loans. And, the property market in China is so tightly controlled alongside access to mortgages that most Chinese people have to save for 20 years, without the ability to invest or earn interest, in order to purchase a modest apartment at an exorbitant price.

My point is that China's economy is structured to extend state influence, restrict the autonomy of private enterprises, bolster state-run export industries, and force the average Chinese citizen to save an enormous portion of their savings simply to obtain lower-middle class luxuries such as home ownership, reasonable access to health care, and sufficient money for retirement. In fact, China has the world's highest private savings rate. Consider that the ubiquitous American loan: car, house, second mortgage, credit cards, and student loans. They constitute negative savings. As Chinese people have significantly limited access to loans of any kind, they are structurally forced to save more.

Back to my initial point, American policy-makers believe that supporting modest wage growth will spur domestic demand and economic freedom. However, it is clear that despite the influx of McDonald's, KFC, and other bastions of "freedom," China maintains unflinching influence over its economy, wage growth, property prices, access to loans, and business development. That wage growth, globalization, and American companies will lead China to more and more economic and political freedoms is an unfortunate delusion.

Crack and Kong

2010-02-02T19:13:00.000-08:00

The final assignment for my journalism class was a feature article. I wanted to profile a rich, successful, normal marijuana user as an alternative to the catch-all "Drugs Are BAD!" policies of Hong Kong. However, since I waited until three days before this journalism assignment was due, I had to piece together a somewhat lacking and certainly broader piece on drug usage and drug policy. Surprisingly, wealthy investment bankers don't want to talk about their drug habits to students with voice recorders... After agonizing over what clever, insightful words I wanted to use to entitle this piece, I landed on "Hong Kong's Drug Policy." So, enjoy.

The Beauty of the Game, a new show on TVB Jade Channel in Hong Kong, plays like a Chinese version of the American HBO hit Entourage, a show that depicts a young superstar actor and his buddies from New York navigating the quintessential Hollywood lifestyle: attending movie premiers, partying with all the big names of Los Angeles, and basking in fame and fortune. In a similar fashion, The Beauty of the Game is a drama about young actresses grappling with their careers in the Hong Kong entertainment industry. But, unlike Entourage, this show isn’t just trying to entertain. Hong Kong’s newest television drama is funded and produced by the Hong Kong Narcotics Division of the Security Bureau and the Action Committee Against Narcotics. It is one of the government’s latest moves in a series of initiatives designed to address rising youth drug use in Hong Kong. And, just as every television series begets devoted fans and adamant critics, the anti-drug initiatives are drawing both praise and skepticism.

Depicting the demise of seemingly normal young adults at the hands of drug use on broadcast television is just the latest in a breadth of actions by the Hong Kong government targeting a reduction in drug abuse, especially among youths. “Juvenile drug abuse has become serious in Hong Kong,” Chief Executive Donald Tsang said in a recent address to local parents. A report by the Central Registry of Drug Abuse (CRDA) states that the makeup of drug users is becoming younger. According to the CRDA’s report, the proportion of under-21 drug users has increased by 24% between 2004 and 2008. Further, schools are becoming the locale of drug use, with usage at schools increasing by 135% across the same cited time period.

Hong Kong clearly hasn’t been ignoring the latest statistics. “The Government has geared up law enforcement activities to curb the supply of drugs,” Mr. Tsang said. Alongside more banal measures like an anti-drug music video and anti-drug text messaging competition at a recent concert, one of the most contentious programs being implemented in Hong Kong is a voluntary “Trial Scheme on School Drug Testing” in the Tai Po school district to “tackle the problem of hidden drug use,” according to Mr. Tsang.

Contrary to Mr. Tsang’s suggestions, the seriousness and frequency of youth drug use in Hong Kong is not a recently developed problem, nor is the idea of drug testing Hong Kong students a recently developed solution, according to twenty-seven-year-old Amanda Chen, whose name has been altered at her request. International schools were implementing random, mandatory drug tests during her days of attendance, although she was never tested personally. And, the program didn’t have the desired impact. “I didn’t care that there was mandatory drug testing at school. The kids that wanted to use drugs used them,” she said.

Ms. Chen worked in marketing for a prominent Hong Kong magazine until she was laid off in February. I met her at a local hair salon, where her hairdresser does double-duty as her drug dealer. “Marijuana is my drug of choice. I can’t handle ecstasy anymore, that used to be my favorite. I’m too old now, my body can’t handle it.” Although Ms. Chen said she was a “late-bloomer” when it came to using drugs (she didn’t start until the age of 17), she found herself immersed in a culture of drug use since secondary school. “When I was sixteen, my aunt asked me if I knew anyone who didn’t use drugs. My honest answer was none,” she said.

Although Ms. Chen uses drugs, she thinks “the age at which children are beginning to experiment with drugs is definitely a problem.” She added, “I used to go raving. I would take “E” (ecstasy) and go to giant parties. Some of the girls there couldn’t have been older than twelve or thirteen. It was shocking, but what can you do?”

Later, she noted that she wasn’t opposed to voluntary drug testing initiatives. But, her and many others have concerns over the potential effectiveness of the government’s policies. Her hairdresser cum dealer James, who requested that his last name be withheld, chimed in that “the program is useless! Unless students are compelled to test, there is no point in spending money on this.”

The program also drew the attention of a prominent professional organization. The Hong Kong College of Psychiatrists issued a strident criticism of the proposed voluntary drug-testing campaign. In a written statement, Dr Lam Cheung said, “There is a dearth of data on the effectiveness of school-based drug testing as a means of combating psychoactive substance abuse and its potential harm.” Concerns range from privacy and confidentiality to cost and effectiveness. Dr Lam Cheung goes on to say that “because it is a voluntary program, active drug users may simply refuse to be tested.” He added, “It is well established that the window for detecting most drugs of abuse is 72 hours or less.” As a result, a student can temporarily delay a drug test in order to ensure a negative test result, before resuming drug use. So far, the government has reported that 61 percent of eligible students have enrolled in the testing program. “That leaves 40% of the population that may be active drug users who will never be tested,” wrote Dr Lam Cheung.

Another concern with the government’s policies arises from the one-size-fits-all approach to drug abuse. Nicole Fung, a professional piano teacher, used to sell marijuana with her ex-boyfriend. She spent her days teaching piano and her nights driving across the city delivering to customers. She likens marijuana usage to legal drugs like tobacco and alcohol and believes there should be a distinction in public policy between marijuana and harder drugs. “The people who we sold to all had jobs. They were normal, working people, not scary, not addicts. But, marijuana and heroine are both treated as the same thing,” she said, adding, “I don’t think it is fair to punish and treat possession of marijuana the same as harder drugs.”

Ms. Fung touches on a point that resonates with many critics of drug policies. Reports on the harmfulness or addictiveness of marijuana are hard to come by. Alcohol is reported as having a higher rate of addiction than marijuana. Yet, Hong Kong remains adamant in refusing to parse drugs into categories. At the premiere for The Beauty of the Game, Principal Assistant Secretary for Security, Eric Lee, said, “There is still misunderstanding about drugs despite concern from all sectors of the community. Some people think drugs can be categorized as ”soft” and “hard.” … It is necessary to enhance our publicity and preventive education efforts so that the public will understand there is no distinction between “soft” and “hard” drugs. They should never try!”

Hong Kong’s catchall, abstinence-based approach to drug use is reminiscent of United States President Ronald Reagan’s infamous “Just Say No!” anti-drug education program. Started in the 1980s, Reagan’s program funded billions in educational programming and literature, spanning from car bumper stickers to posters to guest speakers in schools. Unfortunately, the program quickly became synonymous with wasteful spending and lacking results, rather than declining youth drug usage. In fact, a study by the University of Michigan to track the success of the program found marked increases in youth drug use over a ten-year period. The failure in President Reagan’s ambitious program was attributable to the very same concerns being raised about Hong Kong’s anti-drug campaign.

The absence of nuance in the government’s approach to drug enforcement and education percolates into related sectors of public policy such as rehabilitation and treatment. Hong Kong publishes myriad literature on drug use. One bright green leaflet implores: “Be free. Illicit drugs are all addictive. It is extremely difficult to quit drugs. Be free. Don’t even try drugs for once.” Obvious issues in syntax aside, Ms. Chen expressed concern over the nature of the dialogue. “I think it is important to bring drug use and addiction into the open, and I’m okay with public service announcements,” Ms. Chen said, but added, “Something like this reflects poorly upon the government. Any student with exposure to drugs isn’t going to take this seriously. … Not all drugs are addictive.” Ms. Chen asked, “How can the students trust the government’s message when it is so uneducated?”

Those who work in the treatment community have also expressed concern over their preparation and ability to provide adequate care to addicts and drug abusers. Herman Chung-Shing, a member of the Social Welfare committee, expressed concern that “the amount and type of preparation amongst the medical community responsible for providing youth drug abuse treatment is not enough.” He added, “We need to train more doctors on how to treat children struggling with drugs.”

Chief Executive Tsang acknowledged a need for dialogue, saying, “Prevention of drug abuse begins at home.” But the “Not Once. Not Ever.” educational program leaves little room for a productive exchange between students and their parents, teachers, and social workers. Ms. Fung is concerned over a lack of addiction and counseling services for existing drug users, and feels the policies address prevention, but not treatment. “The program might work for someone who has never tried drugs,” Ms. Fung said, but added, “What about all of us who have already started? I don’t feel there is anyone students can turn to to ask for help.” Hong Kong’s motives are admirable. But, if you find yourself addicted to watching all the latest episodes of The Beauty of the Game, consider the many other addicts who aren’t watching.

Profiling a Former Hong Kong Investment Banker

2009-11-30T23:52:00.000-08:00

Things are winding down for my stint in Asia. This is the last week of classes. I have finals and projects over the next two weeks, and then will spend a week in Beijing, a week in Colorado for Christmas, a week in New York City for New Year's Eve, a week in Minneapolis/Sioux Falls, and then back to WashU for classes in mid-January.

Looking back at this experience, it has been tremendously informative as a cultural endeavor. However, academically, CUHK didn't leave me satisfied. Aside from my Chinese language courses, which were developed through a partnership with Yale University, my classes were neither engaging nor particularly instructive. I believe that is primarily the symptom of the classes being taught by non-native English speakers to classrooms of non-native English speakers. Everything felt distilled, and there was absolutely no student-teacher dialogues or interaction. Further, it is difficult to take a class seriously when the exam is rife with glaring grammatical errors. This was especially frustrating on True/False questions, where poor syntax made interpreting the precise meaning of the sentence guesswork.

I have been taking a graduate journalism workshop, and recently completed a profile of a former investment banker who switched jobs to work at a school. Here's my article:

With the highest density of skyscrapers in the world and one of the longest average workweeks, Hong Kong isn’t known as a Mecca for leisure and relaxation. In a recent struggle within Hong Kong’s legislative council over what sorts of democratic initiatives should be advanced, the pro-Beijing camp argued that Hong Kong, as an economic city, was full of profit-hungry go-getters that could care less about democratic reforms or, more largely, politics in general. As long as taxes are kept low and controls on the capital market are limited, the politicians argued, the citizens of Hong Kong would be satisfied. On the basis of Hong Kong’s global reputation, it is easy to take these sweeping generalizations at face value. However, glossing over Hong Kong as a city of dollars and cents belies the deeper struggles and triumphs of its citizens.

With such great emphasis on accruing wealth, an oft-encountered dilemma found within Hong Kong’s 7,000-plus high-rise buildings is striking a proper work-life balance. Lawyers, investment bankers, and businesspeople face ultra-competitive colleagues, and many times sacrifice any semblance of free-time, family, or friends in order to advance their careers.

Wayne Yuan, a fit thirty-something who lives in Po Lam and worked for Bank of New York for the last sixteen years is all too familiar with the heavy demands of a professional career. Mr. Yuan worked in trade finance and relationship management and says, “the top management only cared about profits and cost-cutting.” He added that the corporate atmosphere “put me under tremendous pressure to sell more, sell more, sell more.” Frequently, he would be asked to stay until midnight to complete a conference call with his New York associates, only to be asked to return at 8am the next morning.

We meet in his apartment, nicely appointed, but also, like most public housing in Hong Kong, excessively cozy. He sits on a piano bench in a small bedroom shared by his housekeeper and seven-year-old daughter Angel. He married his wife, a physical education teacher and librarian, in 1996. His other daughter, Annie, is twelve, and actively involved in pre-teen pursuits: texting and Facebooking.

Up until May, Wayne Yuan could have been described as just another suit, a hard-working, moderately wealthy executive biding his time in the office. Unlike many in Hong Kong, though, Wayne was unwilling to give up his health and family as payments towards advancing his career. After sixteen years of high-pressure sales, Wayne found a job at his wife’s secondary school, and now works as their accountant. “In Hong Kong, most people work their entire lives for a nice flat,” Wayne says. “But you have to find a balance between your job and your life,” he adds as he leans back against his daughter’s piano, still wearing his workout clothes from a game of racquetball with a colleague.

This philosophy put him at odds with the heavy demands of his banking career. For Wayne, the decision to change jobs was far from a knee-jerk reaction to a stint of unhappiness at work. In order to qualify himself for the accounting position, Wayne enrolled in City University of Hong Kong and took classes at night for the last few years. It seems, at first, counterintuitive for a man who values time with his family to commit himself to even more hours away from home. But, it becomes clear that his discontentment stems not from the number of hours worked, but the corporate culture to which he was subjected. After a number of mergers a few years ago, Wayne notes that “the old-style management, which focused on making customers happy, changed dramatically when the bank was taken over by a foreign firm.” He adds, “Later [post-merger], the top management no longer cared about making our clients happy. We were to push for more business, more money, before our clients began to trust us.” He adds, “The money might have been lower before, but at least our clients trusted us, and I enjoyed my job.”

The push for account growth became so fervent that Wayne felt his clients were becoming annoyed with how often he was required to call them. “If they need something, they will call me. Now, I have to call them twenty times a month, just to satisfy my managers,” he says.

There was no end to the calls for higher revenues, in Wayne’s eyes. “Top management demands five percent growth, so the lower management wants to impress them and demands ten percent,” he says. With a hint of desperation in his voice, he adds, “There is no need to maximize the profit. How do you maximize the profit? One million? Ten million? One billion?”

Working at the school couldn’t be farther from the intense ends-justify-the-means environment at the investment bank. Wayne doesn’t miss much from his old career. “My school does not have profit goals, daily meetings, or overbearing managers,” Wayne says. However, there is one aspect of his former life that was harder to give up. “The money is much, much worse now. I make less than half what I made at the bank,” he says. Wayne is saving far less now than in his previous career, but surprisingly, he doesn’t feel he has had to make drastic changes to his lifestyle. The family retained their live-in housekeeper, and they still manage to pay for private English lessons, piano lessons, and weekend trips to China.

So far, Wayne seems happy with his career change. “I am happy now. I feel better. At Bank of New York, I couldn’t escape the high stress,” he says, adding, “I have time to exercise. And, I have more time to communicate with my wife and kids. Although, my oldest daughter has started to outgrow her daddy.”

Wayne says that many of his colleagues at the bank want to leave, but find a career change financially unviable. “They can’t afford to leave, even though they are unhappy,” he says.

Under the shining veneer of gleaming skyscrapers and well-dressed executives, there lies in Hong Kong a sense of unease among some people unable to escape from the fast-paced structural pressures of their careers. Wayne represents, for Hong Kong, a seemingly rare success in managing the demands of a career without abandoning family, friends, and health.

“When you become a top manager,” Wayne cautions me, “please remember that it is not all about the money.” Perhaps Wayne doesn’t care about politics or democratic initiatives, but the members of the legislative council would be deeply mistaken in pegging him as just another profit-hungry go-getter.

Bill O'Reilly Does Something Good?

2009-11-18T04:06:00.001-08:00

In this clip, you'll see O'Reilly initially making a bet that Lou Dobbs would not be fired from CNN. Somehow, the 24-7 media machine has simultaneously offered up two good things: Lou Dobbs leaving CNN and Bill O'Reilly, in a moment not unlike the Grinch suddenly relenting, donating $10,000 to Habitat for Humanity. Would it be too much to ask for Glenn Beck's resignation for Christmas?

I'll Save The Pecan Pie For Later

2009-11-11T02:26:00.000-08:00

I'm pretty sure that I'd like to have chocolate-chip cookie dough ice cream in my last meal if I were on death row. Virginia executed John Allen Mohammed today, the infamous DC sniper. He kept his last meal request secret.

However, this website chronicles the final meal requests of all of the inmates executed by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

Some of my favorites are:

Stacey Lawton, a former carpenter, who requested one jar of dill pickles.

Gerald Lee Mitchell, also a carpenter, who at the age of 17 shot his brother-in-law with a sawed-off shotgun, requested one bag of assorted Jolly Ranchers.

Cornelius Goss, who shares my birthdate of May 24th, requested one apple, one orange, one banana, a coconut, and some peaches.

James Smith requested yogurt.

James Powell, an electrician, requested one pot of coffee.

Poor Ruben Cantu did not have his final request entirely filled. He requested barbecue chicken, refried beans, brown rice, sweet tea and bubble gum. Unfortunately, bubble gum is not permitted in Texas prisons.

Ricky Ray Rector, suffering from severe brain damage after shooting himself, apparently couldn't comprehend his final sentence. After finishing most of his meal, he set aside his pecan pie and told the guards he wanted to save it for later as he was lead away to the execution chamber.

Finally, Odell Barnes, Jr., who sexually assaulted, stabbed, and shot a woman, requested Justice, Equality, and World Peace as his last meal.

My New Friend Mukesh

2009-11-09T04:11:00.000-08:00

I think that it is important to notice people. New-age Evangelical proselytizing strategists suggest using this tactic as a means of forging new relationships. The old school bible-thumping involved bait-and-switch sales techniques. For example, in Florida on spring break, they tasked bikini-clad women (drunk with the love of Jesus H. Christ) to hand out fliers for a Luau Party! with "live music and drinks." When the hormonally-induced attendees arrive, they discover Diet Coke, skits about God, and literature on Christianity in place of Captain Morgan and wet t-shirt contests. This kind of bait-and-switch approach failed, though, to produce results, meaning converts. We capitalist humans are good at smelling a sale coming from a mile away.

The new strategy, as I mentioned, involves "all bait and no switch" in the words of Ira Glass. Disciples are trained to avoid the misdirection and overt persuasions and instead sit in malls and coffee shops and simply notice people. Not surprisingly, when someone asks "How are you?" and then actually lets a person finish a few sentences without interjecting about themselves, they are taken aback by the genuine show of interest. So, that is step one. Step two is build friendships, gain proximity to new groups of people, and exert Godly influence through assimilation, leading by example.

Back to my original thought: I think it is important to notice people. Case in point, I spent this whole weekend with people whom I had met in completely random settings. I hung out with an Indian multi-millionaire property mogul named Mukesh after chatting with him in an Indian restaurant a few weeks ago. I joined his brother and some of his close friends for dinner, got driven around in a chauffeured Mercedes, chatted with the CEO of Air India, sat in on meetings with Uzbek diamond traders, sang Hindi karaoke, and got served breakfast by servants in a penthouse...all because I was willing to chat with a stranger in an Indian restaurant.

I am not sure if I engaged other people this openly while I was Back In The USSA. I am partially motivated by the fact that, halfway around the world, I don't have a circle of friends and family to fall back on. So, perhaps I am more open and more likely to show an interest in others. It has lead me to meet some great people. The people with whom I have spent the most time with in Hong Kong are two locals, Nicole and Lillian. One I met on an elevator, the other in a train station. They've invited me into their homes, shown me the non-touristy side of Hong Kong, and introduced me to their friends. I sat down and had dinner with Nicole's family on her birthday, and it was the first time they'd ever had a white person in their home.

My most poignant experiences in Hong Kong have come from the friendships I have forged through happenstance encounters with complete strangers. Upon returning to the USA, I'm going to behave like a tactically-minded Evangelical and spend more time noticing people.

On An Aeroplane Over The Sea

2009-10-29T07:06:00.000-07:00

From Studying Abroad in Hong Kong

This was a roller coaster at Ocean Park, a theme park in Hong Kong. Very, very tame rides. Asians frighten easily. It's science. But, the views were incredible.

This weekend I went to my first horse racetrack. The stadium is 1/4th mile long; the seats were at least half-filled the entire length. It reminded me of a casino because everyone was there to gamble and it reeked of desperation and empty hopes. There were losing betting slips scattered everywhere, and at the end of the night they came out with leaf blowers to blow them away. Many of the "professional" horse-race gamblers use hyper-obsessive techniques like monitoring the weights of the jockeys, examining how the horses walked before the race, and perusing extensive publications devoted entirely to predicting the winners of the races. From my short stay at the track, I found that there was no correlation between the favorites to win and the actual winners. But, the professionals would dismiss this as purely anecdotal.

One interesting thing is that Chinese people are afraid of the number four. If they paid attention, they should be afraid of seven, because seven eight nine. Nonetheless, there is a going theory that the number four horse enjoys abnormally good odds because even if it is a favorite to win, no one wants to bet on it.

I went to my first movie in Hong Kong. Despite the fact that people rarely hang out in their apartments and are always out shopping and eating, cinema is not a popular past-time in Hong Kong. I wouldn't be surprised if Sioux Falls, South Dakota had more theatres than Hong Kong. Anyways, one cool thing about the movies in Hong Kong is that you get to pick your seats, like you're on an airplane. I requested a window seat.

Also, they serve chocolate popcorn and fish meat balls. The chocolate popcorn is very similar to the 'Kettle Korn' they serve at fairs, in that it is sweet and salty at the same time. Pretty delicious, but I prefer salt and butter.

In other news, I changed my flights and will be spending Christmas in Colorado with my family and New Year's Eve in New York City.

On Second Thought...

2009-10-21T05:43:00.001-07:00

A contrary view to the Slate article I linked to in my last post, which discussed the scourge of constant distraction and our mind's fixation on "seeking" appears in a Wired Magazine article.

"Most jobs don’t allow that [daydreaming on a three-hour walk], of course. That’s why I’ve begun to think that the “social” Internet has become a rough substitute. If your boss is trying to force you to focus on PowerPoint and Word documents, you might gravitate to mentally discursive, floaty experiences — the idle surfing of Facebook updates, Wikipedia entries, YouTube videos, casual games like Bejeweled. Maybe these things aren’t so much time sucks as desperate attempts by our brains to decouple from the go-go-go machine and head off on its own."

Mid-Life Crisis

2009-10-21T03:30:00.000-07:00

I am thinking about buying a Corvette; I am halfway done with my semester in Hong Kong. Time has been passing much more quickly as I've settled into a routine with class, gotten used to campus, and am no longer continually buffeted by random Asian novelties.

I went to Taiwan a few weekends ago. My extreme nerdiness shone through on the flight back from Taipei, as I was excited about it being my first time on a Boeing 747, which is the airplane with two stories and a big hump at the front. I took a video of myself walking onto the airplane, which I don't really recommend watching, except for the ambient Chinese voices and funny stares from people realizing I'm videotaping them.

Taiwan was pretty cool. People are aggressively friendly. That is, they will come up to you, without provocation, and try to help you find something or get somewhere. Perhaps their behavior stems from their fixation with white people/English speakers/rugged good looks? For some reason, and I don't remember doing this, I ordered Kosher meals for the flights to and from Taipei. As an aside, Asian airlines are far more enjoyable than American ones. They gave me copies of the International Herald Tribune and Financial Times, served me a full meal, and checked back with me at least three times to see if I wanted more coffee, all during a one-hour flight. So, they came up to me with this Kosher certificate and asked me to inspect my meal as we were waiting to push back from the gate. Then, amidst a sea of Chinese/Taiwanese people, the lone six-foot (okay, 5'11") white dude, moi, gets served fifteen minutes before everyone else. And, everything was individually wrapped, so it was a noisy, messy ordeal getting everything open. I'm putting my best foot forward to assimilate fully into the Asian culture. That's why I buy Starbucks in the airports.

A highlight from Taiwan was visiting a tea house at a tea plantation in the foothills outside of Taipei. It was very foggy and wet, and it made the whole experience of drinking tea on a patio overlooking the lush hills of the plantation very surreal.

I got a job as an English tutor for a private family. Each week, they have me over for dinner, which their domestic helper cooks, and then I tutor their daughter for an hour. It is fun to hang out with the family in their home, which is much different than interacting with locals in restaurants or on campus. Last week, the daugher and I played piano, and the cousins were all pretty excited to have me around and had lots of questions for me. It is the most welcomed I have felt so far in Hong Kong.

The family I tutor for is relatively wealthy. However, for the two parents, two kids, and their live-in domestic helper, they have a mere 700 square feet in their apartment. The home is comfortable and well-decorated, but I don't know if I could adapt to such a cramped living arrangement.

We have a long weekend coming up. I don't have class Friday or Monday. Many people are traveling to Tokyo, Cambodia, Thailand, mainland China, and Taiwan. Unfortunately, I have to teach English on Saturday, and try to finish all of my law school applications. Having it as a nagging obligation while being over here in Hong Kong, along with my research paper, has been pretty frustrating. I hope that I will be able to relax after finishing them, but recognizing my own neurotic inclinations, I will more likely consume myself obsessing over potential acceptances/rejections.

Finally, some unsolicited psychoanalysis. Sometimes, I feel as though I am in a continuous state of restlessness and distraction. It is difficult for me to maintain focus on one activity for a long period of time. While trying to focus on something like studying Chinese, I'll feel an overwhelming urge to check my email or go get a drink or engage in any other inane distraction. After coming upon this surprisingly relevant article (which I likely read while distracting myself from whatever task I was supposed to be accomplishing), I decided to divert my fleeting attention into a necessarily longer-term activity: reading books. So, I still pull myself away from studying and other obligations just as readily, but I make an effort to avoid checking Facebook or surfing Digg, and instead try to read. I'm not sure if it is at all helpful, but I have gotten way more discretionary reading done in the last few weeks than what I'd normally accomplish in a year. I read "Brave New World," "The Stranger," and an eerie, very entertaining book, which I just finished, "Dangerous Laughter."

Post Cereal in Asia...

2009-10-04T14:43:00.000-07:00

I worked for Ralcorp Holdings this summer and Post Cereal is one of their recent acquisitions. It is fun to see my summer office's address (800 Market Street, Saint Louis, MO) on cereal boxes in random Chinese grocery stores.

Today, I encountered what I consider to be an egregious failure in custom-tailoring cereal boxes to the region in which they are sold. They are pulling at the heart strings of the burgeoning wealthy at the local discount grocery stores by imploring: Let's Feed America Together!

Not Sleeping When I Need It

2009-09-29T13:41:00.000-07:00

It is 4:45am and I cannot manage to fall asleep. I need to "wake" up in about two hours to take the circuitous bus, train, and then bus route to the airport for my flight to Taiwan. My flight leaves way earlier than everyone else's, so I'll have the day to sleeplessly wonder around Taipei and I'll meet everyone else tonight at the Chocolate Box Hostel.

I got a research fellowship through the Center for Research in Economics and Strategy at WashU, and have been supposedly working on a research paper on franchise regulations all summer. The final deadline is tomorrow, and predictably, I still have quite a bit of ironing out to do before I can turn it in. Thus, I am bringing my laptop to Taipei as a sad consequence of my procrastination, and will be hanging out in a coffee shop for part of tomorrow in order to finish the paper. I am actually quite excited about handing it in, though, as it will be the longest paper I've ever completed at around 40-45 pages. If you require some light reading to put you to sleep at night, let me know and I'll send you a copy.

As I was restlessly daydreaming, I reflected on the fact that other than purchasing my airline tickets for Taipei, I have gone the whole month of September without making a purchase with a credit or debit card. I've been using cash for everything, as Visa levies a heavy fee on individual foreign currency transactions. This exclusive use of cash contrasts sharply with my normal spending, which takes place almost entirely through my credit or debit cards. I am curious what psychological effect this has been having on my spending, to part with cold-hard cash rather than swiping a card. I recently heard on a Marketplace podcast that when it comes to discretionary spending, people tend to spend over twice as much with a credit/debit card than with cash. However, perhaps this is negated by my spending in psychologically dissonant Hong Kong Dollars, where a $15 coffee is actually only around two US dollars.

In other news, I watched the very first episode of Mad Men (my procrastination knows no bounds) and am really excited about watching the rest of the series. I especially enjoyed the Bob Dylan song that concluded the episode.

Happy Birthday, People's Republic of China!

2009-09-28T09:52:00.001-07:00

It is a very exciting time for the Communist Party of the People's Republic of China. On Thursday, they celebrate sixty years in power. The government has organized a massive celebration to take place in Beijing. There will be a military parade showcasing the best of China's new military technology and arms, involving 5,000 personnel and 150 aircraft. Also, there will be a 200,000-person parade with bands, dancers, and floats. They've been holding rehearsals for the last four months, and the grand finale is a 34-minute fireworks display in Tiananmen Square.

One Chinese man casually expressed his feelings for the upcoming celebration, saying "We just wanted to show our affection to our motherland and deliver the message that solidarity is power." Simple, but so eloquent.

This all sounded pretty exciting to me, especially because they only throw these giant birthday bashes once every ten years. I looked into arranging a trip to Beijing to experience the parade first-hand, only to find that I had underestimated the absurdity of the Chinese government.

Sure, they're closing down airports, streets, and businesses, hiring hundreds of thousands of extra security forces, preparing for four months, and setting up random ID checkpoints throughout the city for the month leading up to October 1st. Local businesses are losing money from random closures and street blockades,citizens are being constantly disrupted by parade rehearsals, and even kites have been banned during the celebration. But, it's all worth it, as the people of China get to come together and celebrate their love for their country in a massive display of pride. Right?

Oh, actually, no one is allowed to attend the parade. All of the hotels with views of the parade route are not allowed to rent out their rooms. Only a select few government officials and VIPs have been invited to watch the parade in person. The thousands of local university students that are marching in the parade are participating because it is mandatory. And, everyone in Beijing will be forced to stay at home and watch the celebration from China's TV network.

So, my plans to go to Beijing were thwarted. What could be a more fitting and symbolic way for the Communist Party to celebrate its sixty years of success in maintaining power in China?

Congratulations, Beijing...

My singular act of rebellion:

Why Sleeping Was Troublesome & English Debate

2009-09-22T09:58:00.000-07:00

Probably in a fitful rage of pro-environmentalism, the Chinese University of Hong Kong has installed timers on all the air conditioning switches in the dormitory rooms. In order to turn on my air conditioning and insulate myself from the 90-degree heat, I must put money on my student card and load hours onto the timer.

Last weekend, at around 12:30am, I noticed that I had only 01:30:00 of remaining air, sort of like Apollo 13. My student card was depleted, the office was closed, and after donning my robe and going downstairs, I found that the add-value machine wasn't working. Luckily for the environment, my A/C remained off that night, saving hundreds of watt-hours for Mother Nature!

Also, I went to the information session for the English Debate Team, where "silence ISN'T golden." Yes, that's their actual slogan. In order to whet the appetite of the audience members, they staged a mock debate on the following resolution: The House supports that schools should mandate compulsory drug tests for its students.

The English Debate Team takes itself a bit more seriously than WashU's team. For example, I had to fill out an information sheet detailing my past debate experience and personal information to "apply" for the team. Tomorrow, to try-out for the team, I will give a speech for a panel of judges and then debate with the collective panel on random topics.

Despite how seriously they take themselves, they are still inherently and noticeably disadvantaged by debating in a second language. None of the speakers in the mock debate were particularly charming or persuasive, and much of their language and speaking is over-formalized and forced.

I also wasn't impressed with the scope of the debate. One side argued that catching kids was the only way to bring the "terrible moral dilemma of drugs" to the surface, while the other side noted that the "terrible moral dilemma of drugs" needed to be solved at its roots: parents, teachers, and drug smugglers. They all agreed positive results should be promptly investigated by the police. Neither side parsed the term drugs into anything more specific, nor did they question relevant issues like privacy, the efficacy of the war on drugs, logistics of enforcement, or protectionism.

I look forward to wooing them with my first language tomorrow. And, my favorite picture of the week:

Imitation Las Vegas

2009-09-13T08:30:00.000-07:00

I think that I have finally figured out my classes. At this point, I'm registered for: Intermediate Financial Accounting, International Finance, a graduate journalism class called 'feature writing,' and two Mandarin Chinese (Putonghua) classes. After one week I have learned how to say I love you (wo ai ni), you are my friend (ni she wo de peng you), and my favorite: do you love me? (ni ai wo ma). I have been practicing this last sentence in public places, such as the subway, much to the chagrin of my Mandarin-speaking friends.

The first week in my Putonghua classes was spent mostly practicing all the strange noises that my American mouth is not trained to create. Making nonsensical sounds over and over again as a class with a slightly over-enthusiastic teacher made me feel like I was in a rehabilitation class after a massive stroke or horrifying car accident. (Think "fee fi fo fum" x100)

In other news, I traveled to China's cheap attempt at Las Vegas this weekend, a city on the south coast of China called Macau. We took the TurboJet ferry there on Saturday morning, which took about an hour. Macau was a Portuguese settlement and was controlled by Portugal until ten years ago, when it was handed over to the Chinese government. Like Hong Kong, though, Macau maintains an independent currency, legal system, and basic government structure.

There is beautiful Portuguese architecture, such as churches, statues, and museums, interspersed among a relatively dirty and busy Chinese city. Macau feels like an underdeveloped Las Vegas. Just like Las Vegas was grimy and unpolished fifteen years ago, Macau is still undergoing growing pains. There are giant new casinos, cranes, and construction projects all over the city, but the current offerings of casinos feel empty and soulless. I've never been to Las Vegas, but I feel like there are things to appreciate aside from gambling: world-class restaurants, art museums, Cirque de Soleil, Broadway productions, the Bellagio fountain, and lots of other entertainment. In Macau, it just feels like they transplanted a bunch of glitzy buildings from Las Vegas, but only brought the slot machines and gaming tables.

Also, everything seems unpolished. The one museum we visited was empty, un-air conditioned (it was 95 outside), and staffed by Filipinos that knew nothing about what was inside.

On a more positive note, a dude from Miami and I went to the MGM Grand, which felt much more legitimate, and used the concierge service to get recommendations for a good Portuguese restaurant. They made reservations for us, booked us a taxi, and we spent our hour and a half of free time with our feet in the water at the beautiful infinity pool which looked out on the Friendship Bridge and the South China Sea. When we returned, the women was standing in the lobby waiting for us, greeted me as Mr. Fancher, and they escorted us to our taxi, which cost us $2 US each.

It was my first time trying Portuguese food. I had African Chicken, which is supposedly a renowned Portuguese dish. The origin of the name baffles me. My friend had octopus rice, which was also quite delicious. A big benefit to living in Southeast Asia is that my money takes me a very, very long way.

Before we caught the ferry back to Hong Kong, we saw Taiwan's display for the international fireworks competition.

I'll end this post with a little gem I found in the middle of Macau. Perhaps this sign means something completely innocuous, but those symbols look vaguely familiar... Notice my utter disgust:

Coffee & Fireworks

2009-09-09T08:18:00.000-07:00

There is plenty to appreciate about Hong Kong: its energy and modernity, its proximity to yet freedom from China, cheap food, lush mountains jutting out of the South China Sea, efficient public transport, and a beautiful skyline. However, I must regretfully admit that after one week in Asia, I've found myself missing facets of American life.

I miss walking along tree-lined streets with no one else around. I miss a flat, easily walkable campus. I miss seventy-degree weather and less-than 85% humidity. I miss being able to carry on a fluid, cogent conversation with any of my classmates. I miss whole-wheat toast, vegetables, tomatoes, drinks without loads of sweetened condensed milk and sugar, and boneless chicken breast. I miss real coffee.

Adjusting my coffee consumption has been one of the most noticeable changes to my daily life. In the States, large cups of normal, drip-brewed coffee are readily available. Commercial access, along with my home-brewed cups of Joe enable me to fulfill my routine consumption of 4 cups of coffee easily. Here, a cup of coffee is usually instant and always small.

I've pared down my consumption to one mini-cup a day, complete with undissolved particles of dehydrated instant coffee powder, which, by comparison, makes the dregs of my American coffee seem like Kopi Luwak.

I miss the ritual of my habit. I miss waking up and looking forward to the smell of my morning coffee. That this is my most significant source of cultural dissonance on my first visit to Asia, I should consider myself privileged. And, I can look forward to the smell of gunpowder this weekend at the Macau International Fireworks Display Competition.

Classes? I Thought This Was Vacation...

2009-09-07T01:43:00.000-07:00

I had my first day of classes today, which was just two Mandarin Chinese language classes in a row. Normally I'd have a third class in the morning, but it was cancelled today. We are given fifteen minutes between classes, which is NOT enough time to make it across campus, especially when navigating the campus bus system, among other reasons.

Some observations:

1) Cryptic Casino-Style Buildings from which you can't escape

This one relates to not being able to make it to class on time. I'm not sure if it is specific to the university, or a general architectural principle in Hong Kong, but the buildings are EXTREMELY confusing. Sometimes, what seems to be one building on the outside will actually be two completely separate buildings on the inside. Transferring from one to the other requires walking outside. Or, being forced to take astoundingly slow elevators. Pretty sure my average wait for an elevator to arrive today was over 150 seconds.

Or, it is just impossible to get out of a building, because of random dead-ends and staircases that don't go all the way down to the street-level. For example, I was released from my first class today at 2:15PM. I did not escape from the building until 2:25PM... Hopefully, I will master the labyrinth.

2) CUHK students don't listen to iPods or wear sunglasses

I perhaps encountered one or two other students over the course of the day that had either sunglasses or an iPod. From speaking to some Singapore students, it sounds like they generally regard it as stupidly dangerous to drown out the ability to hear what is going on around you, for fear of getting eaten by a dragon or hit by a bus.

And, it sounds like sunglasses are regarded as frivolous. Which is odd when considered alongside my next observation:

3) Umbrellas are primarily used as a provider of shade.

Many people walk around the campus on a bright, hot day with umbrellas. It hasn't rained yet really, even though it is monsoon/typhoon season, but I am excited to see if umbrellas are ONLY used for sun protection. This would amuse me.

4) Learning a foreign language in English with a bunch of people whose first language is German/Cantonese/Finnish/Spanish/Korean/French is supremely awkward.

I am the only native English speaker in one of my sections of Mandarin Chinese.

Finally, a picture:

This women makes REALLY delicious thousand-year-old preserved egg tarts. I don't know how old the rotten egg actually is, but when you bite into it, it gives off a bit of an ammonia aftertaste...and it is supremely delicious. The place is called Tai Cheong Bakery. In the picture, she is baking egg tarts, which are much less weird, and equally amazing.

Trip to the Mall

2009-09-04T01:18:00.001-07:00

I thought I would share a video of my orientation roommate Nicholas from Singapore doing one of his magic tricks for 川西晴奈 from Japan. He didn't elicit quite as strong of a reaction from me...

This was in a little "fast food" joint in the Sha Tin mall, about five minutes by train from the university. A giant pile of fried rice and a Coke cost under $4 US.

From Hong Kong!

Discounts in Asia

2009-09-03T00:49:00.000-07:00

Today is the last day in the orientation dormitory. I will move to my permanent residence in the "International House" tomorrow. It is apartment-style, with a balcony, TV, and living room, and kitchen split amongst 10-15 people. It is towards the top of the mountain, so the views of the surrounding area are incredible. Unfortunately, I am on the first floor, so I won't enjoy the view quite as much.

From the International House to the closest student canteen requires climbing 100 steps and then riding an outdoor lift up another 100 feet. There are many outdoor lifts and elevators on campus for people to go from one level of campus to the next, because the campus is built into the side of a mountain and in some parts it is too steep even for stairs.

I have found that one of the cheapest ways to garner huge discounts is to pretend that you're Asian. For airfares, I have heard that a flight that may be $400 USD on the American website is the equivalent of $150 USD on the Chinese language version of the website. Also, there seems to be quite a premium attached to Western-styled food.

You can see the menu for the "Western" coffee shop in the student canteen across from my orientation dorm. The price for a large brewed coffee is approximately $2 USD. However, literally steps away in the same building, you can order coffee from the cashier for under thirty cents US. Incidentally, in order to get the coffee from this "Western" menu, you have to order it through the SAME cashier that you would use to buy coffee for thirty cents. Yet, inevitably, many of my American colleagues are ensnared by this rather clever pricing scheme.

Arrival in Hong Kong

2009-09-02T02:38:00.000-07:00

I arrived in Hong Kong last night after a collective 20 hours on airplanes, and had a day of orientation activities, setting up bank accounts, getting ID cards, etc. First and foremost, Hong Kong is SO HOT. It is insane. And, the campus is on a giant mountain, which makes it both beautiful and incredibly exhausting to walk around.

One of the things that has surprised me the most is how little English is spoken on the campus. Many times, when I have asked for directions, the students have absolutely no idea what I am saying. An interesting habit of Chinese people that speak English is that they add the word "actually" even if they're agreeing with you. For example, I asked a girl on campus if I needed to go left to get to a building I was looking for. She responded, "Actually, yes, you will go left." Perhaps it was taught as a polite gesture for the beginning of a sentence?

A couple pictures from my first days:

My first view ever of New York City, taken from the Newark airport

Yum. On-campus canteen (student dining) My lunch consisted of a giant pile of white rice with a chopped up piece of chicken which still had the bones running through it and a bit of oily cabbage. It cost $19.5 Hong Kong Dollars, which is approximately $2.50 US. Food is VERY cheap, and a little bit sketchy.

Slow-motion NYC

2009-05-11T13:52:00.000-07:00

New York 2008 from Vicente Sahuc on Vimeo.

I'm just goin' down to the Oyster Shack, man. Come on!

2009-05-10T23:12:00.000-07:00

Meet Steve. He knows his rights.

Part II: Notice the lawn mower pulled up to the house.

This is an ACTUAL news story.

2009-04-29T19:32:00.000-07:00

I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry. This is beautiful.

Always Sunny.

2009-04-25T17:49:00.000-07:00

Clearly, Kim Il-sung is happy to have had his portrait drawn. The late leader's photograph brightens the day for the North Koreans working below.

A glimpse into a North Korean border town, taken from China.

Volcano Sledding

2009-04-20T12:14:00.000-07:00

Sledding down a volcano at 50 MPH.

Your Grandpa Was Dumb.

2009-04-16T14:02:00.000-07:00

Half the population of 1917 would be considered mentally retarded by today’s measurements. The average IQ of a person in 1917 would score only 73 on the current intelligence quotient test, with 100 being the average.

I Want To Be Patrick Bateman.

2009-04-09T16:32:00.000-07:00

7 minutes every morning, Patrick Bateman style.

War on People

2009-04-05T10:54:00.000-07:00

For the vast majority of drug users, especially marijuana users, it is a victimless crime. In the "War on Drugs," the victims are the drug users, their families, their communities, and their workplaces. They are sent to jail or treatment, to the detriment of their careers and families. Most of the time, the treatment is cookie-cutter at best, designed to treat the general topic of "addiction" with lectures about inanely general topics like "change." Instead of being productive members of society, the law consigns these "marijuana addicts" to waste away in jail or treatment.

The law is the problem, not marijuana. Anti-drug advocates try to create an inseparable idea of harm, the coalescence of all the problems drugs cause. However, a closer examination reveals that the cause of all the harms elicited to justify harsh punishments for drug laws arise from the enforcement of law itself, rather than the effects of the drug usage.

Why can we not focus our efforts on eliminating real crime by addressing the greater root causes? Instead, we let our cities fall into oblivion, all the while still blindly enforcing possession laws with greater vigilance than violent crimes. The "War on Drugs" is a war on people.

Man-Date CHAMPIONS on the Fox 2 Morning Show!

2009-03-19T07:25:00.001-07:00

Here's a clip. Jason and I ended up dominating. He won the air guitar competition, and I won the corndog eating contest.

Jason and I won bro-date VIP passes to the advance screening of "I Love You, Man" tonight.

Today's Titillating Tidbit.

2009-03-09T16:15:00.000-07:00

One in three children eat fast food EVERY DAY.

Titillating tidbit = kid with man tits.

14-year-old Author of 'Define Conservatism'

2009-03-08T10:12:00.000-07:00

This kid is great. Rush Limbaugh in training.

Mmm....fart on me, baby!

2009-03-06T16:09:00.000-08:00

Apparently, scientists, probably in some sort of gross experimental orgy, discovered that a molecule contained in farts makes rats horny. Some day, they hope to use this as an alternative to Viagra.

Getting up, au naturel, I guess... But, really, who could prefer a pill? Brilliant work, guys.

A Great New Pic.

2009-03-05T16:35:00.001-08:00

The last enemy combatant being held on American soil is Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, an alleged sleeper cell agent for al Qaeda. He was arrested in Peoria, Illinois in 2001, and has never stood trial or been convicted of a crime.

However, in an act of good will, ostensibly inspired by our new President, they have allowed al-Marri to pose for a photo for his Facebook profile. This is the first photo of him allowed to be released since his arrest.

Please friend him. He must be lonely after being held in complete isolation for five years.

So, Maybe I Cried A Little...

2009-03-05T13:59:00.000-08:00

Sharing deliciousness.

2009-03-03T21:12:00.000-08:00

Josh Delman's blog. Although, the proprietary format is frustrating. I haven't yet figured out how to interact with it.

Totally Rubbish.

2009-03-03T13:59:00.000-08:00

Only 6% of Madagascar's trash and industrial waste is collected and disposed.

The Green Room

2009-03-01T21:16:00.000-08:00

Ron Jeremy walked into Graham Chapel from a side door, into a small room adjacent to the filled, murmuring auditorium. He was unshaven and sported a blue Hawaiian shirt that said "Molokai."

"Where's the green room?" he immediately demanded. Green room is showbiz jargon for the place with food and drink to placate performers as they wait to go on. After being informed that he would be required to walk out in front of the audience to get back to the eats, he plainly protested:

"It's about surprising them. I walk on stage and everyone applauds. Hey! It's Ron! What are they gonna do? Meh...we already saw him five minutes ago. It ruins the excitement."

Someone pointed out he could access the green room from outside, abating his growing frustration. During this exchange, I was standing...waiting, impeccably dressed in my pink shirt/tie and pressed black suit. Mostly, I was excited to be proxy to this exchange. Certainly, this was a problem that would arise exclusively amongst celebrities and fame. Not just everyone required a green room.

Not that the green room was remarkable. A small room with two chairs. The offerings? Eight bottles of Fiji water (It DOES taste better, doesn't it?) delicately arranged in two rows of four. And, a Schnucks-bought plastic tray with an array of placidly unoriginal raw veggies and some fashion of dip. Surprisingly, the unimpressive assortment wasn't underwhelming. I found myself reveling in the privileged status of those, myself, who would require this room. It exudes exclusivity, only to be occupied by the most prominent few and their encompassing entourages. The glimpse of show business was enticing, leaving me with a lingering high of self-importance. I've made the decision. I will, one day, once again require a green room.

Senior Sendoff

2009-02-01T00:39:00.000-08:00

This was an essay commissioned for my Creative Writing course in my last semester of high school. I was nostalgically searching through my circa-2004 documents, and came upon this. The assignment was a senior reflection. Reading it has elicited mixed feelings:

a) The inept writing is hard to palate.
b) I was a MASSIVE goober. (still am?)
c) In consolation, the premise is semi-reasonable.
d) My high school totally did look like a run-down airport.

Enjoy:

Subconsciously, I’d always dreamed of high school being like that show on MTV, Laguna Beach. Everyone in high school is gorgeous and rich, and it’s perpetually sunny and warm, even the “nerds” drive Mercedes-Benz convertibles to school. Besides some exciting everyday high school drama, high school is essentially one big happy party after another. Unfortunately, entering the likes of Lincoln High School my freshman year shattered those dreams. Stepping into the halls of Lincoln is a little like stepping into the concourse of a run-down airport, complete with terminals A-E, although I’ve never figured out the D-wing. Lincoln High School certainly isn’t glamorous, nor, frankly, are the people in it. It’s depressing at times, talking to people who go to schools with swimming pools, and Macintosh computer labs, and…tanner girls, but despite the misgivings and cold temperatures surrounding Lincoln High School, it is my high school, and my memories from it will last a lifetime. So, at the very least, I should embrace my memories, and reflect on the good times I did have.

To me, the most amazing aspect of high school is the tremendous changes I have made from the beginning of freshman year to now. The most prominent and obvious of changes was in height. I went from the 5’0” freshman, codename “Smalls,” to the taller-than-my-grandma senior I am now. Also, I’m pretty sure I’ve become classier. I was quite the nerd as a freshman. A nerd without a Mercedes-Benz at that! But, although I’m still nerdy, I’ve grown a little less socially inept. I’m able to dress nicer, talk lower thanks to puberty, and have a few conversations each day that don’t deal with video games. Perhaps none of this has that much to do with high school, but at the same time, I’ve never honestly concentrated that much on high school itself. I’ve enjoyed debating, and playing my trombone, and tennis, but to be honest, the classes themselves haven’t consumed a large majority of my time. But, that’s okay. Participating in myriad activities, for me, is more rewarding and educational than just focusing on classes. I love to learn, and my interests are scattered all over the place. It’ss why I’ve never been able to focus on one thing. That’s what made high school such a memorable experience for me, though. The broad amount of activities and trips and groups has allowed me to experience incredible things over the last four years, and through that I’ve learned about myself and what my interests are. That’s been my philosophy throughout high school: Try everything, and pursue what you like. I’d recommend that to everyone, because the knowledge I’ve gained about myself will help me choose, later on in life, a career or hobby that I’ll love. Past high school and college, there’s no more participating in every club and hobby available. My job will take most of my time, but what I’ve learned in high school will help me find something that I love and allow me to do it for the rest of my life. I’m grateful for all the opportunities high school has afforded me, and look forward to pursuing some of them for many more years.

High school is a learning experience, and using it as one has made my four years truly memorable and rewarding ones. I have no regrets, just excitement for the next stage of my life and what it will bring. Seize the day, it’s what made high school the incredible experience it was, and it’s what will make college the learning experience I look forward to. Goodbye, Lincoln.

Clever Nerdy Guy on Daily Show. Brandon Heller?

2009-01-31T10:07:00.000-08:00

This dude is nerdy and witty. A potent combination. He also resembles the man who rushed me into TKE, Brandon Heller. Brandon built his own Segway, from scratch. Pretty ridiculous. Enjoy:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

P.W. Singer

Daily Show Full Episodes
Funny Political Videos

Important Things With Demetri Martin
More Funny Videos

Legalization.

2009-01-29T14:01:00.000-08:00

This video makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

Behold! Scarlet Bagel!

2009-01-27T14:12:00.000-08:00

Ridiculous high school video project for AP Lit & Comp. A parody of Scarlet Letter. Note the high production value and cohesive script.

If you can't bear to watch the whole video...at least start at minute six with the amazing montage love scene. I cry everytime.

Who Loves Guantanamo?

2009-01-24T10:33:00.000-08:00

In an article in Financial Times today, it was reported that:

"Republicans yesterday pointed to reports that a former Guantanamo Bay prisoner had become a top al-Qaeda operative in Yemen to cast fresh doubt about President Barack Obama's plan to close the prison."

Even the US penal system, a global laughing stock, releases prisoners when they finish with their sentence. In fact, prisoners are typically released early and placed on parole. The average felon completes only 15% of his or her sentence in prison before being placed on supervised release. High recidivism rates in the US point to the failure of prison as a formative rehabilitative experience. However, don't we still release these prisoners in accordance with their sentences?

Why, then, is concern of recidivism among Guantanamo prisoners a legitimate argument towards keeping the prison open? I use the word recidivism liberally, as many or most of the prisoners are guilty only of arousing suspicion or having too close proximity to foreign terrorist institutions. Most haven't been sentenced, nor have they been given any sort of tribunal or trial to define what it is they actually did, a precursor to culpability even being discussed, let alone systematically determined.

Arguing that Guantanamo remain open for fear of detainees reverting against America (Surprisingly, after being imprisoned indefinitely against their will without access to US due process and without communication with their families for years, many will be taking the Pledge of Allegiance out of their daily routines.) retains traction only because of the politically-charged buzz word, terrorism, and the undue fear it arouses.

These same republicans would never argue that we indefinitely extend, in violation of the US constitution, the prison terms of American prisoners for fear of potential repeat offenses. Their equivalent argument for Guantanamo detainees should be promptly disregarded.

Peace, Bush.

2009-01-20T20:36:00.000-08:00

President Bush leaves the White House in a helicopter. Wait, FORMER President Bush leaves the White House in a helicopter. Mmm...former.

But Carlos Slim Helu Loves the New York Times...

2009-01-20T07:57:00.000-08:00

Abating, at least temporarily, talk of the New York Times' coming demise, a Mexican telecommunications mogul, the second richest man in the world, loaned the company 250 million dollars.

Hating on the New York Times: Part II

2009-01-19T21:03:00.000-08:00

I came upon this in a book I'm reading entitled, In The Jaws of the Dragon: America's Fate in the Coming Era of Chinese Hegemony. American journalism takes, in general, a decidedly forgiving pro-China stance in its reporting, such as support of China's bid to join the World Trade Organization, despite the countries' heavily protectionist trade policies.

The New York Times, on April 24, 1994, published an article that painted this picture of China's growing freedoms:

"At one reception I asked a provincial official how he had become so well informed about what is happening in Europe and the United States. 'I watch CNN, the same as you.' he explained. Some 100 million Chinese, many there say, now have access to TV programs transmitted by satellite. 'Ten years ago,' the official added, 'I could have been arrested for owning a satellite dish.'"

The author noted: "The vast middle class now forming in China almost assures the triumph of democracy and its freedoms....Capitalism is nothing more than democracy of the marketplace - the right of people to make their own decisions about economic matters. Once a free market system is established it is but a short step to political democracy."

The New York Times, though, failed completely in fact-checking the article. Satellite dishes had not been legalized, and are still not legalized. Aside from a few privileged government departments and tourist hotels, use of a satellite dish runs up an astronomical $6000 fine. Astronomical, because this fine is three times the per capita GDP of China in 2006.

They never retracted the story or issued a correction. Further, perhaps because the article is so blatantly propagandistic in retrospect, the article can no longer be found in the newspaper's archives or Lexis Nexis. The author's only means of obtaining the article was a hard-copy of the paper at a library.

Dumb It Down

2009-01-19T17:39:00.000-08:00

Many of us are familiar with our television favorites being dumbed down in order to appeal to a wider base of viewers. But, now, the New York Times, too?? The recent spate of NYT television commercials are bearable, but this is much less forgivable.

Banana?

2009-01-19T17:10:00.000-08:00

You can bet, as I did, with 1000 to 1 odds, that Obama will utter the word 'banana' or 'Angela Merkel' in his inaugural address tomorrow. If you bet one dollar on each, you could win two thousand dollars if he slips in a phrase like: "I found the banana of Angela Merkel, and returned it to her promptly, which is only the start in a new era of bilateral diplomacy and strengthened American soft power through confidence-building gestures."

Or, "The burgeoning German-American banana trade, facilitated by Chancellor Angela Merkel and the creation of new American trade envoys, signals the beginnings of anti-protectionism in American trade policy, which I advocate in recognition of the integral part unencumbered global market participation plays in today's economy."

Say it, Obama. Say banana. Do it for America.

Corporate Cycling

2009-01-13T21:43:00.000-08:00

Buried amongst provisions to bailout financial institutions, purchase toxic mortgage-backed securities, and commence emergency bridge loans, the $700 billion bailout includes The Bicycle Commuter Act, which gives companies $20 per month per employee that regularly commutes to work via pedal power.

Some potential uses for the money include covered bicycle parking, showers for employees, and reimbursements for helmets and locks.

Pro-sodomy?

2009-01-12T20:48:00.000-08:00

ThinkProgress posted this gem, an exchange between two favorites: Ann Coulter and Mike Huckabee.

The Final 200

2009-01-12T08:43:00.000-08:00

George Bush has less than 200 hours as President of the United States. Finally getting slightly more candid about his legacy, he said the Mission Accomplished banner "sent the wrong message" and that "obviously some of my rhetoric has been a mistake."

In a pleasing admission regarding his fictional case for war, he quipped, “Not having weapons of mass destruction was a significant disappointment.”

And so was your presidency.

Israeli Deaths

2009-01-11T12:59:00.000-08:00

The number of Israeli deaths from Hamas rocket fire from July until the current conflict: precisely one.

The number of Israeli deaths from Israeli friendly fire in the last two weeks: at least four.

Aww...Wall-E

2008-12-06T15:32:00.001-08:00

In the end, the New Yorker's attempt at naming the top 10 films of 2008 reduces to a single sentence, "All hail Wall-E."

Google Online Symphony Project

2008-12-02T19:17:00.000-08:00

I wish I still had my trombone!

I Am Not Allowed to Disclose That Information

2008-12-02T15:02:00.001-08:00

I'm on the phone with Microsoft right now, and suspected that the forced English from 'Michelle' was in fact someone in a call center in Delhi or Bangalore who had been given a crash course in formal American English.

However, when I asked 'Michelle' where she was located, she replied,

"I'm sorry, sir. I am not allowed to disclose that information."

At which point, she transferred me to a more senior member of her call center named "Bill."

Vulture Watches a Starving Child in Sudan

2008-11-29T14:56:00.001-08:00

'Coconut Diaper'

2008-11-19T14:54:00.000-08:00

I, personally, find 'Clocks' to be an excellent musical rendition of the golden ratio.

However, anyone who likes Coldplay is ceaselessly mocked. For example:

"Know how I know you're gay?"

"How?"

"You like Coldplay."

Even though I'm a Coldplay fan, I appreciate this New Yorker writer's hatred of the band.

Kitty Litter Model

2008-11-12T22:37:00.000-08:00

I think Hans should be a model and pose on cat food and kitty litter bags.

I am curious if getting your cat into the modeling business is a profitable endeavor. How do you get started? Send a couple headshots to Meow Mix? I wouldn't want the fame getting to Hans' head though. He already snorts too much cat nip.

Stop That Smell!

2008-11-12T19:44:00.000-08:00

From the financial crisis and global recession, to the burgeoning Iranian nuclear program, to the rampant and senseless killings in Congo, there is no shortage of grave problems needing attention. In deference to the serious dialogues that need to take place, I'll take on an issue of daily concern to individuals everywhere. No one is spared from its suffering, and the root causes are both unpredictable and plentiful.

Whether it is the cabbage rolls and garlic chicken from PF Chang's that your close friend consumed for dinner, or the Spicy Hot Wings you and the boys had last night at Hooters, or even your Mother's black bean chili, the end result is always the same. And it always smells.

It happens in elevators, public restrooms, cars, and even under the sheets, Dutch Oven style. No matter the context, exposure always necessitates a solution. This begs the question: How do you stop that smell?

Through observation, I've found two popular techniques.

First, a classic, The Two Finger Pinch. This is quick, one-handed, and relatively easy to execute. Below is my attempt to reenact a post-exposure Two Finger Pinch:

Though it is the traditional approach, The Two Finger Pinch can be painful to implement, especially if you have a stuffy, clogged nose. This second technique is better suited to handle a variety of exposure scenarios. In my opinion, the Peace Sign Plug is clearly the best solution:

Hopefully, this dialogue can be an avenue to discovering even better solutions in the future. What's yours?

Why I'm Happy

2008-11-05T19:56:00.000-08:00

Some reasons I am happy Obama will be president:

1) It has been a long, long, long time since the world has been this excited about the result of a US presidential election. Many foreigners are inspired by Obama, and feel that he is the leadership America needs. No matter what he ends up accomplishing, he has already injected much needed legitimacy back into America. How can a terrorist convincingly complain of the evil Western infidels when we have just democratically elected a man with the middle name Hussain as president? I am glad that Obama can inspire the world, and hopefully America can use and benefit from the legitimacy his presidency will bring.

2) Obama is extremely intelligent. He outperformed the Clintons and the Republican machine to go from nowhere eight years ago to the first African American president-elect in US history. Clearly, he has talent, and the campaign has tested him in many ways. He has been consistently cool headed and rational. He has relied on the support of 200 foreign policy analysts in informing his world policy views. He surrounds himself with brilliant men like Paul Volcker, considered the best Federal Reserve Chairman in recent history. I do not know what Obama can ultimately accomplish, and I do not know what he will try to accomplish, but I know that he is inspiring, and I know that he is rational. To me, this is extremely important.

3) I think that there is something really important about our having put a black family in the White House. I think it will do something to this country to see that, and I think it will be positive. Hopefully, this is a huge step in leaving the toils and troubles of racism behind us.

Polling: Round Two

2008-11-04T05:55:00.000-08:00

I got up at 6 AM this morning to vote. I arrived at my polling place around 6:15, aghast to find a line stretching at least four blocks. Apparently, although polling was to begin at 6 AM, voting didn't actually start until 6:30, as many staffers failed to show up on time. I was constrained by an 8:15 AM appointment. At 7:30, after having waited an hour and fifteen minutes, only half of those in front of me had voted, and I left the line, resigned. Hopefully, my second try will be more successful.

Mine is a story of inconvenience, but those who work all day may have only one chance to make it to the polls. The lack of adequate staffing and booths is disappointing. High voter turnout is a welcome change from the apathy of past elections. Greeting unprecedented voter interest with incompetent logistics and half-hearted planning shows the unflinching ability of the American democratic system over the last eight years to be persuasively inept.

Rock n' Roll Joyride!

2008-10-17T15:45:00.000-07:00

Nathan Berdahl was one of the best people you could ever know.

Have a rock n' roll joyride.

He Gets a Little Crazy

2008-10-16T22:16:00.000-07:00

Our riveting dialog continues. Surprisingly, my deft analysis hasn't yet converted him. He has deep faith in trickle-down economics. Is it better to worship Reagan or God?

Jeremy,

Thanks for responding. I agree that we have income redistribution right now, and some level of income redistribution is required for this country to operate. But a promise to take money from 5% of the people and give it to 95% of the people is pandering to the greed and entitlement mentality of the masses. (BTW, its also a lie. Some independent reporting agency says that Obama's plan will raise taxes on the top 19% of wage earners.)

I agree that we as a country need to provide a safety net that provides the basic necessities - which are food, shelter, and medical care - to poor people. That exists today. But if Obama wanted to help the very poor, his proposal would be to increase taxes on 95% of the people so that he could give the money to the poorest 5%! I don't agree at all that we need to steal from the rich to redistribute money to the middle class; I don't think my money should be confiscated by the government so that the plumber who charges me $75 per hour can get free healthcare. Obama's tax proposal is essentially buying votes from the masses by promising to confiscate the money from the rich. Frankly, I find it disgusting. His proposal to tax US businesses is also stupid - this is a global economy, the businesses and jobs will just move overseas - or our businesses will find it impossible to compete with businesses from overseas (See: US Automobile Business) This is another message meant to appeal to the gullible masses, it is not intellectually honest at all.

I totally disagree with your premise that the rich get rich by oppressing or standing upon the shoulders of the poor. I am well off because I have provided a service to my employer that helps my employer make money. Basically, I make much more money for my employer than my employer pays me. I have never walked over a poor person to get my money, nor does my money depend upon lower class people to suffer. I know a lot of rich people, and I don't know of anyone who has gotten rich by oppressing the poor. People get rich by using their talents and efforts to provide a service that someone else values enough to pay them well.

You wrote: "There certainly isn't anywhere near equal opportunity for all in this country, when children don't have access to health care or legitimate education and many families can't afford to send their children to college."

All children and all PEOPLE, even illegal immigrants have access to healthcare. Hospital emergency rooms are not allowed to turn away people who are in need of treatment. Every child in this country is provided with 13 years of free education. Don't tell me that the inner-city public education isn't "legitimate" - many people come out of these schools very well educated because they WORKED at school rather than acting cool. I totally disagree with your assertion that everyone is entitled to a college education. However, you know from experience that a child who performs well in his 13 years of free education also gets a free college education. You EARNED your scholarship, you were not ENTITLED to it.

When you graduate from Wash U, you will likely become wealthy yourself. You will have EARNED your wealth through your talents, efforts, and proper decision making. But what if that dreadful decision that you made a while back had resulted in your scholarship being revoked, jail time, depression, drug addiction, and a life of poverty? Should the top 5% of earners be forced to support you just because you made a stupid decision?

Doesn't the success of Obama himself refute the very concept that the poor or the minorities do not have sufficient opportunities in America?

Mike

Poor black man gonna be President? Guess that's enough for the poor and minorities combined! Welfare? Reparations? Fuck that, we're letting a Po' black man be president.

I digress. Here's my response:

Hey Mike,

First, I wanted to clarify what I meant by the rich being supported by the poor. I am not talking about anything direct. Of course you haven't directly stood upon the shoulders of the poor, that's not what I'm suggesting. I'm saying that capitalism, as a system, requires there to be different income classes. If everyone were earning what you earn, that would be communism. In order for a capitalist system to function, there is a pyramid distribution of wealth. For every executive earning 200K, there have to be managers below him earning 100K, sales people earning 50K, and janitors earning 30K. Do you see what I am getting at? This system in which a business exists that you can give services to requires capitalism, which requires there to be a great deal of low-income wage earners. So, you rely on capitalism, and thus rely on low-income wage earners. I'm not saying you rely on the poor to be oppressed or anything, I'm just saying, you can't be in the top 5% of wage earners unless there's 95% below you.

I very much appreciate your sentiments about not wanting your money redistributed to a plumber who is already well off and charging you $75. However, everyone in this country does not have the access to health care that they deserve. People CAN show up at emergency rooms and get helped if their leg breaks or they're having a heart attack. But, what about surgeries and treatment for cancer? Medicine and antibiotics for people with long-term illnesses? Long-term treatment for people with chronic illnesses? Preventative care? Many of these needs go unaddressed by the current health care system. To assert that a child has proper access to healthcare because they won't get kicked out of the emergency room if they're bleeding to death is superficial. Proper access to healthcare involves much more than this. Further, after a number of days, hospitals can and do kick people out who don't have insurance. We have programs in place to provide medical care, shelter, and food, but they are largely mismanaged, corrupt, underfunded, or plagued by other problems. Our social system needs drastic reform.

From what I have read about Obama's tax proposals, analysts suggest that his taxes on businesses will not be enough to have any significant productivity effect. Further, recent studies have been released that show that through tax breaks, loopholes, and globalization, almost all multinational corporations avoid paying alot of US taxes already. This is from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, about McCain's tax proposals. It shows that the drastic costs of his tax cuts essentially outweigh the advantages of lower tax rates.

The consequences of Senator McCain's proposals for economic efficiency and the distribution of economic burdens depend critically on how the measures are financed. To the extent that individual and corporate marginal tax rate reductions are deficit financed (that is, the government simply borrows more), the positive effects of lower tax rates will be offset by the costs of increased government debt. More government debt eventually translates into higher interest rates, which discourage business investment and consumers’ demand for homes and such durable goods as automobiles, or into increased debt owed to foreigners, which mortgages the nation’s long-term economic future. And if swelling deficits are closed by future tax increases rather than spending cuts, we impose much greater economic costs of taxation on our children and grandchildren than they would face if we do not enact tax cuts today.

If growing deficits eventually require draconian spending cuts—a stated goal of those who adhere to the “starve the beast” theory of government—then vulnerable populations may lack essential services; critical infrastructure investments for roads, bridges, and dams may be deferred; and the national defense may suffer.

The expanded version of Senator McCain’s plan would magnify the advantages and
disadvantages of the basic proposal. Expanding the scope of expensing would move the tax system in the direction of a tax on consumption, rather than income. The biggest drawback of this version of the proposal is that it would add enormously to the public debt. By 2018, tax revenues would be 16.3 percent of GDP, a level not seen since the early 1950s, before enactment of Medicaid, Medicare, or the national highway system. It seems clear that the promises Senator McCain makes (or implies) in his speeches could not be sustained without a radical and unprecedented downsizing of government.

And, this is a general comparison of their two plans. By the way, the full analysis does suggest taxes will only be raised on around 5% of earners. I think where you're drawing your 19% from is that when they do a quintile study, the top quintile (20%) see after-tax income go down slightly. However, taxes decrease for 15% of those people, but they are offset by an increase on the 5%.

If enacted, the Obama and McCain tax plans would have radically different effects on the distribution of tax burdens in the United States. The Obama tax plan would make the tax system significantly more progressive by providing large tax breaks to those at the bottom of the income scale and raising taxes significantly on upper-income earners. The McCain tax plan would make the tax system more regressive, even compared with a system in which the 2001–06 tax cuts are made permanent. It would do so by providing relatively little tax relief to those at the bottom of the income scale while providing huge tax cuts to households at the very top of the income distribution.

Senator McCain has proposed substantial tax cuts, offset only very partially by proposals to broaden the tax base. Some of these tax cuts would have positive economic benefits, but adverse effects of the resulting increased deficits may make the net effect of the plan economically harmful.

Further, since 2001, inequality in distribution of income after-tax has grown faster than inequality of income distribution pretax. This means that tax policy since 2001 has been regressive, through taxes, the inequality of income is exacerbated by taxes that are disproportionately preferential to high income earners. Why is it better to choose McCain, whose tax cuts disproportionately cut rates for those at the top? You complain about Obama's tax policies being unfair because they burden the top 5%. Why, instead, is burdening the bottom 80 or 90% with no tax relief while providing huge cuts to households at the top a better policy? Also, it has been said that Obama's closing of the corporate tax loopholes will actually increase productivity and efficiency, both in how firms invest their money, and in spending less resources trying to avoid tax liability.

Okay, now about education. An article on CNN.com and Foxnews.com recently indicated that in America's biggest cities, the highschool graduation rate was below 50% Many people do not come out of inner-city schools very well educated. Very few people from inner city schools make it into college. An anecdote about a hard-working student persevering through an inner-city school and going to college is a story of survival, not proof of the legitimacy of his K-12 education. Many inner-city schools are plagued by budgetary issues, violence, and a lack of necessary supplies and qualified teachers. These are real problems concerning real schools, largely ones in big-cities. These problems need to be addressed with something besides Bush's unfunded mandate: No Child Left Behind. Children who must attend these second rate public schools are not receiving a proper education. I have volunteered, here in Saint Louis, in some of these schools. They are in terrible shape, and they are not a constructive place for children to learn. Just because the public schools in Leawood and Sioux Falls are safe, clean, and well-funded, does not mean every school is. You are right, every student isn't entitled to a college education. However, I think that if a person works hard in high school, scores well and gets a good GPA, and is motivated to go to college, there should be a system in place allowing him/her to do that. This includes private scholarships, continued funding for Pell grants, and continued funding for the Stafford and Perkins subsidized loan programs.

It seems that you are suggesting that if I had gotten my scholarship revoked, I would have been a homeless bum addict all my life. I find that to be ridiculous. I've never had an addiction, and I don't think that my terrible mistake should've cast me to a life of poverty. Isn't our system supposed to be about rehabilitating people into productive citizens? First, I think that marijuana should be decriminalized. Many recent scientific reports have indicated that it is less harmful than alcohol or tobacco. This is not saying that I didn't make a stupid decision. I chose to take a huge risk, knowing what the laws were. This was incredibly stupid, and I risked my education. However, if hundreds of thousands of non-violent people weren't being thrown in jail for marijuana possession, and were instead given fines, we wouldn't be spending $18,000 per person per year to keep them in jail. I, personally, think that it is an incredible waste of money, and an incredible waste of someone who could potentially be productive in society. If I had been thrown into jail because of my stupid decision, I would be on your tax bill because of LAWS, not just personal irresponsibility. Take someone who works, pays taxes, and smokes marijuana at night. Sure, that may not be a healthy lifestyle, but they are not leeching off the system. However, if they get caught and thrown into jail because of the law, now you have to support them.

In general, I think you were bringing up my bad decision to highlight whether or not irresponsible people should be supported on your money. This is why social programs, especially unemployment and welfare, need to emphasize reintegration into the work force. They need to have specific time limits, and force people to retrain for new jobs. That way, no one lives off welfare forever, and instead becomes a productive, tax-paying member of society. This, however, has little to do with either Obama or McCain, as neither of them have laid out much detail as to social program reform. I think that unemployment should be in place, though. Many hard-working people lose their jobs, especially when the economy is as it is now. Unemployment allows them to survive and support a family while they look for another job or retrain for another career.

Also, I do not think that Obama being successful says there is equal opportunity for all. He is one person, who came from a middle-class family. Anecdotal evidence is never reliable. Even if Obama came from a very poor family, and went to an inner-city school, how many of his friends would have died on the streets from gang-violence? How many would've endured a violent, unstable childhood and found themselves working for 10 dollars an hour for the rest of their lives? The story of one person making it doesn't speak to equal opportunity.

-Jeremy

Family Fun, Continued

2008-10-16T12:30:00.000-07:00

Here is my reply to my Uncle Mike's last email, in which he complained of Obama's communist income redistribution policies. Refer to the Family Fun Feud post to read his email.

Hey Mike,

I think this is where we may come to an ideological stand still. It seems that one of your main issues with Obama is his tax policies, which you earlier claim are fairly meaningless for a presidential candidate. Either way, you say that his increasing taxes on people making more than 250K is income redistribution. I think it is less black and white, and more shades of Grey. Our country has income redistribution right now. People at the top pay more taxes on a percentage and total basis than people on the bottom. People on the bottom, logically, receive more in social benefits (i.e. food stamps, unemployment, etc.) than people at the top.

This does not mean that we are socialist or communist, just because we have some form of income redistribution. It has been well proven that trickle-down economics, the idea that relieving the tax burdens on the rich and corporations will grow the economy and benefit the lower class, doesn't work. I just read, from an economist journal, that approximately 3-4% of tax breaks to the wealthy actually make it down the economic ladder. In fact, 75% of the economic growth in the last 8 years has gone to those at the top 1%. The middle and lower classes have been waiting to "get wet" under the Republican's trickle-down economics for the last 8 years. They simply haven't seen any benefits. Why is it unfair to employ policies that ensure that every child in this country has the opportunity to receive a good education and be guaranteed health insurance? Shouldn't we as a country find it important to ensure that everyone has access to some level of basic necessities? I think you have to ignore alot of problems in this country to claim that there is equal opportunity for all. There certainly isn't anywhere near equal opportunity for all in this country, when children don't have access to health care or legitimate education and many families can't afford to send their children to college.

Where does your income, as someone earning at the top of the ladder, come from? How is it supported in a capitalist society? Your ability to earn a great deal comes from a wide-base of much poorer wage earners. Without these millions of people willing to work for 8 or 10 dollars an hour, the cost of operating almost every business in this country would become prohibitive. Wage earners are NECESSARY for this capitalist system to function. So, the relationship between wage earners and people making 250K a year is quite real. The relationship between people over the age of 25 and under the age of 25 is entirely arbitrary. I don't think the comparison is legitimate. I do not think that Obama or the democrats' policies are aimed to force everyone into an equal standard of living. Instead, I think they are designed to finally bring to the struggling middle class and lower class basic opportunities and necessities that they require.

You talk about it being unfair that the majority of americans, the 95% of Americans making under 250K, would be allowed to vote to capture more earnings from the top 5%. Why, in the world, then, would the opposite be more fair? Under McCain, capital gains taxes, which effect only those at the very top of the income ladder, will receive significant tax breaks, while the majority of Americans see little benefits. Oil companies will receive billions in tax breaks under McCain, yet the idea of a middle class family struggling to get by receiving an additional $2000 in tax cuts, allowing them to pay their health insurance premiums, is unfair??

I think that the top income earners in this country enjoy a great deal of advantages, through corporate tax policies, government provided infrastructure, cheap labor from wage earners, subsidies, trade policy, tax breaks, etc. So, from this perspective, I do not think it is socialist or communist, or unfair income distribution, to say that some percentage of the great benefits reaped by those at the top should be captured and distributed to the middle and lower classes, so that they can be ensured basic services and necessities. I think this is the best way to reach equal opportunity in this country.

Jeremy

Finally a legitimate Republican campaign ad!

2008-10-15T19:24:00.000-07:00

This is a real campaign print ad, courtesy of the Sacramento County Republican Party. It's good to see some intelligent discourse every once in awhile.

Behavioral Control

2008-10-14T23:40:00.000-07:00

My philosophy teacher, on Monday, chastised me after class for being consistently 5-10 minutes late to class. I lay here in bed, with class at 10 AM, knowing undoubtedly that I will arrive on-time tomorrow.

I find it unsettling that an action so petty can so readily constrain me. Even more unsettling: What assortment of more powerful forces am I also so indefensibly answerable to?

Fun Family Feud!

2008-10-13T22:45:00.000-07:00

When I come across a juicy left-leaning article or liberal piece of information, I quickly pass it on to my ultra-conservative family via email. I hope that this constant barrage will gradually indoctrinate them. I sent my family an email about national debt the other day, and it resulted in the following exchange with my Uncle Mike. This is my first email:

National Debt When Jimmy Carter arrived at the White House:

$660 billion.

Added during Carter's four years: $337 billion.

Added during Ronald Reagan's eight years: $1.6 trillion.

Added during George H. W. Bush's four years: $1.6 trillion.

Added during Bill Clinton's eight years: $1.5 trillion.

Added during George W. Bush's seven years, nine months: $4.5 trillion.

Portion of the $9.5 trillion added to the national debt during the past 31 years and seven months that came during Republican presidencies: $7.7 trillion.

Percentage of that $7.7 trillion added during George W. Bush's two terms: 58%.

Could somebody explain again what "fiscal conservative" means?

My uncle Mike, who is decently wealthy, had the following response:

Jeremy,

I'm not annoyed at all, and thoroughly enjoy this type of discussion.

It has been a while since I took Political Science, but I seem to recall that the President has no authority whatsoever over national spending. Isn't that the legislative branch? Since the President has no control over either tax rates or expenditures, this analysis is quite meaningless. It would be informative if it compared the percentage of national debt when the Congress was controlled by Democrats vs. Republicans. Could you find that analysis?

BTW, this banking mess was started by the idea that the government needed to enable more people to buy houses. Sounds great, right? Who could argue? Anybody who would suggest otherwise is clearly an oppressor of the masses, and probably a racist to boot.

The government pushed for Fannie and Freddie to lower their qualification requirements, to guarantee loans that they had not previously guaranteed. Adjustable rate loans with low teaser rates to make it possible for more people to qualify based upon initial monthly payments. 100% loan values when previously 80% was the maximum (That rule was in place to ensure that Fannie and Freddie could take a 20% drop in market value before their guarantee had to be met. Basically, Fannie and Freddie went from guaranteeing that home prices would not drop by more than 20% to guaranteeing that home prices would not drop PERIOD.) Then they offered no-documentation loans for those who still could not qualify or were just frauds. These policies, NOT deregulation, caused a massive increase in the demand for homes, which naturally caused a dramatic increase in the price of homes. Fannie and Freddie were now effectively guaranteeing that the 50% home price increases seen over the past 8 years or so would never retreat.

Which party do you think was most influential in pushing these new policies and regulations through? Which party would think that, "it's not fair" that only wealthy people can afford a big house in the suburbs? Which party's current VP and Presidential candidates were amongst the top 5 recipients of campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie?

Here is what it comes down to:
Do you believe people are entitled to what they earn through their talents, efforts, and decisions? (Capitalism)
Or do you believe that everyone should have the same rewards, regardless of their talents, efforts, and decisions? (Communism)

Do you believe that EVERYONE is entitled to a big house in the suburbs? Your presidential candidate certainly does!

Mike

Well, I hate those damn Reds. He almost had me convinced. Here's my response:

Hey Mike,

I appreciate your response, and I enjoy your writing. But, before I can agree with your relegating this presidential election to Capitalism vs. Communism, I must disagree with you on some of your assumptions.

First, if the President has no control over spending, why are we spending any time at all worrying about the tax policies and spending proposals of McCain and Obama? You are correct that the legislative branch must approve or disapprove a budget. However, the president composes the budget. Legislators are largely constrained to either approving or disapproving a spending proposal. Congress does have an effect on the ultimate amount of spending, but the president wields a great deal of power in the tax policies and spending that ultimately gets approved. And, the Bush administration was unfortunately backed by a spend-now-pay-later Republican majority in Congress from 2003 - 2007. I will try to find some analysis of Republican versus Democrat spending when each had control of Congress.

This is from Paul Krugman, a professor at Princeton, who just won the Nobel Prize in Economics today. His analysis seems to directly contradict yours. Here's part of what he wrote:

But here’s the thing: Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the explosion of high-risk lending a few years ago, an explosion that dwarfed the S.& L. fiasco. In fact, Fannie and Freddie, after growing rapidly in the 1990s, largely faded from the scene during the height of the housing bubble.

Partly that’s because regulators, responding to accounting scandals at the companies, placed temporary restraints on both Fannie and Freddie that curtailed their lending just as housing prices were really taking off. Also, they didn’t do any subprime lending, because they can’t: the definition of a subprime loan is precisely a loan that doesn’t meet the requirement, imposed by law, that Fannie and Freddie buy only mortgages issued to borrowers who made substantial down payments and carefully documented their income.

So whatever bad incentives the implicit federal guarantee creates have been offset by the fact that Fannie and Freddie were and are tightly regulated with regard to the risks they can take. You could say that the Fannie-Freddie experience shows that regulation works.

Okay, its me again. “Owning a home lies at the heart of the American dream.” A quote from Bush following his proposal in 2002 for a set of policy initiatives designed to increase homeownership. He's a republican, right? Here's a clip from a 2004 White House press release from the Bush administration:

Expanding Homeownership. The President believes that homeownership is the cornerstone of America's vibrant communities and benefits individual families by building stability and long-term financial security. In June 2002, President Bush issued America's Homeownership Challenge to the real estate and mortgage finance industries to encourage them to join the effort to close the gap that exists between the homeownership rates of minorities and non-minorities. The President also announced the goal of increasing the number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million families before the end of the decade. Under his leadership, the overall U.S. homeownership rate in the second quarter of 2004 was at an all time high of 69.2 percent. Minority homeownership set a new record of 51 percent in the second quarter, up 0.2 percentage point from the first quarter and up 2.1 percentage points from a year ago. President Bush's initiative to dismantle the barriers to homeownership includes:

American Dream Downpayment Initiative, which provides down payment assistance to approximately 40,000 low-income families;

Affordable Housing. The President has proposed the Single-Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit, which would increase the supply of affordable homes;

Helping Families Help Themselves. The President has proposed increasing support for the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunities Program; and

Simplifying Homebuying and Increasing Education. The President and HUD want to empower homebuyers by simplifying the home buying process so consumers can better understand and benefit from cost savings. The President also wants to expand financial education efforts so that families can understand what they need to do to become homeowners.

So, the Bush administration saw increasing homeownership as an end goal. The result? No foresight into reasonable regulations and safeguards against predatory lending. Further, the deregulated banking environment (McCain: The Deregulator!) allowed for commoditization and securitization of the mortgages, resulting in the mortgage-backed security. These securities allowed private lenders to issue no-collateral, no-documentation loans that they could pass off to investors in a matter of days. This relived them completely of their obligation to lend responsibly.

Further, here's a clip from a New York Times article about McCain's disingenuous ties with Freddie and Fannie:

It turns out that the Washington firm of Rick Davis, Mr. McCain’s campaign manager, was profiting handsomely from Freddie retainers until the government took over the mortgage-finance companies last month amid the credit crisis.

Mr. McCain insisted that Mr. Davis had no involvement with his business for several years. But he appears to have been benefiting from the $15,000 a month that Freddie paid the firm from the end of 2005 through last August. Previously, Mr. Davis was paid nearly $2 million across five years in running a group set up by Fannie and Freddie officials to beat back stricter regulation.

The good, the bad and the ugly of lobbying are well known, but it’s a stretch for a man with 25 years in Washington to demonize it. His brain trust is heavy with consultants and lobbyists. Other McCain aides with past ties to the lending companies are the strategist Charlie Black; Wayne Berman, deputy campaign finance chairman; and Mark Buse, chief of staff at Mr. McCain’s Senate office.

When a lack of regulation in the mortgage industry lead to this crisis, and republicans pushed for more homeownership without further oversight, I don't see how McCain comes out on top. Obama certainly doesn't believe EVERYONE is entitled to a big house in the suburbs, and neither does McCain. However, McCain believed, up until a few months ago, that Wall Street and our nation's economy should operate with as little regulation and oversight as possible. This collapse of our economy has proven that this ultra-free market stance simply doesn't hold water. McCain has said himself that he doesn't know much about the economy. His advisors? Phil Gramm, a likely choice for Treasury secretary, is a huge deregulator who took special care while in the Senate to prevent oversight of financial derivatives. The very derivatives that lead to the collapse of AIG and Lehman. House Republicans recently recommended, as a solution for the financial crisis, that we eliminate capital gains taxes. A troubled financial institution has no capital gains to tax! The intellectual state of the Republican party is in a sorry state.

Okay, I've gone on long enough. I hope you can see, at least, that I am not of my beliefs because I believe in socialism or communism. Quite the opposite, I see realism and intelligence in the Democratic party right now, and don't see Obama as having the socialist doctrine you assign to him.

Jeremy

Hawt business, I thought. But, there's no convincing my Uncle Mike. Here's the finale. He sounds pretty reasonable until he starts talking about forced labor camps...

Jeremy,

You have a significant advantage in time to do research on this topic! I’m also disappointed that you would find a Princeton Nobel prize economist’s opinions more credible than mine!

The President makes a budget proposal, but my recollection is that the congress just calls this “DOA” and creates their own budget. I don’t think the congress is limited in any way by the President’s budget proposal. The President’s only choices are to veto the congressional budget or approve. Congress has refused to allow him a line-item veto, so he has to approve or disapprove the congressional budget in its entirety. But like I said, it has been a long time since I took Government class. The tax policies of McCain and Obama are fairly meaningless, other than their ability to convince Congress to follow these policies or veto proposals that differ from their policies. The Executive branch has much more to do with foreign policy than it does with the economy, but the American public doesn’t realize that and blames the President for everything. I think the American public should select Congressmen based primarily upon fiscal policy and Presidents based primarily upon Foreign policy.

I am also fairly certain that the President cannot pass laws to prevent the creation of mortgage-based financial derivatives – that would again be up to congress. Who has been in charge of all of the congressional finance committees in the recent past? Weren’t both Obama and Biden chairmen of certain finance committees, which is why Freddie and Fannie gave them so much money?

Its pretty clear that both parties had ties to Fannie and Freddie, and thanks for reminding me about sub-prime not being guaranteed by them. However, I believe that they lowered their limits for what they accepted for their guarantees, making their “prime” mortgages more risky. The run-up in prices (bubble) also erased the safety margin that the down payment requirements were meant to provide. I also think that the government regulators (not de-regulators) forced them to lower these limits several years ago. I would appreciate it if you would set me straight on these topics if I am mistaken.

Overall, do you really think that Republicans were more heavily involved than the Democrats in efforts to increase home ownership by people who could not afford them? Is that really the Republican M.O.? There is nothing wrong with that goal, but the methods were disastrous - reasonably predictably so.

Do you not also agree that Obama’s proposal to increase taxes on people making over $250K while reducing taxes for everyone else is income redistribution? Isn’t income redistribution the very heart of communism?

What is fair about using the rules of democracy to enable the majority to confiscate the earnings or belongings of a minority? Is that just OK since the minority is rich in this case? Would you also be in favor if the employed majority voted to force the unemployed minority into forced labor camps? Or if the majority of people over age 25 voted to confiscate the earnings and belongings of those under age 25? What’s the difference?

The financial crash certainly has narrowed the asset gap between the rich and the poor, but I’d prefer that the poor get rich rather than the rich get poor! I think history shows that attempts to ensure that the rich and poor share the same standard of living results in everyone having a very poor standard of living. The US Constitution calls for equal opportunities for all, not equal assets for all.

Finally, I think it is trouble for our country whenever EITHER party has control over both the congress and the presidency!

Mike

Palin's Resignation

2008-09-28T20:57:00.001-07:00

I'm going to make a prediction. Palin doesn't show up for the VP Debates at WashU on Thursday. Perhaps a last minute resignation, or a third 'campaign suspension.' Speaking of McCain's last campaign suspension, it turns out TV ads continued to be ran, every field office was open, and no events were canceled. However, I digress. How can the McCain campaign allow Palin, who exhibited the intelligence of a thirteen year old in the Couric interview, to dribble nonsense from her empty head on stage as a representative of their campaign? I see no option for McCain, then to engineer someway of distancing himself from his god-awful VP choice.

Considering Sarah Palin for the role of VP in this country is irresponsible and laughable. Have Americans really become so distanced from rationality and so grossly misinformed that they would seriously think Sarah Palin should be one step away from the presidency? I don't think I'd trust her to manage a Burger King in Juneau, let alone our fucking country. I didn't think it possible to go lower than Dubya this election, but our nation has astonished me with a resounding, echoing empty-headedness.

As John Stewart says, here it is, your moment of Zen:

Couric: You've cited Alaska's proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?

Sarah Palin: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and, on our other side, the land-boundary that we have with Canada. It's funny that a comment like that was kinda made to … I don't know, you know … reporters.

Couric: Mocked?

Palin: Yeah, mocked, I guess that's the word, yeah.

Couric: Well, explain to me why that enhances your foreign-policy credentials.

Palin: Well, it certainly does, because our, our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of. And there…

Couric: Have you ever been involved in any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?

Palin: We have trade missions back and forth, we do. It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia. As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state.

Assassinations, Security, and Elections

2008-09-07T01:51:00.000-07:00

Assassinations. Riveted? Before I go further, it is necessary that I specify why I’ve chosen to write about Barack Obama and John McCain being assassinated in September or October of 2008. Unlike Fox News or CNN, I am not bringing up ‘Obama Assassination Attempt: Guns Found!’ as a piece of base tabloid sensationalism to lure in more trashtastic (not to EVER be confused with Fanchtastic) viewers. No, I respect the readers of the Fanchtastic blog and would never subject them to pathetic junk food writing. My purpose is to reveal the necessity of basic humanitarian needs as a precursor in any society to democracy and free elections.

At sixty some days before the election, most Americans are waist-deep in Obama/McCain news and punditry. How devastating to our political process would their assassinations be? Who would fill the void? There are many who could step up as qualified candidates for either party. However, in the wake of the deaths of both major candidates, would Americans be prepared to make an informed decision in November? Similar to post 9/11 America, fear would grip the country leading to panic-driven decision making and dangerous blame seeking. Following September 11, America surged with zealous uninformed hate for the Muslim world. The assassinations of Obama and McCain would perpetuate similar fear-based sentiments. Envision, further, if on election days, polling centers were being attacked. Millions of Americans had no running water or sewage. Food shortages plagued cities. Looting left thousands of businesses without inventory and bankrupted. How successful would a presidential (or any) election be?

Now, think back to those triumphant Iraqis, parading their purple fingers and newfound ‘democracy.’ Let alone a lack of basic provisions like food, security, and shelter for a predominance of Iraqis, most are illiterate. Those that aren’t are exposed to state propaganda and censored news. The efficacy of elections in America with these circumstances seems preposterous. Yet, the major news networks in the US, acting as Bush administration lackeys, gushed about the successful implementation of democracy and free elections in Iraq.

Before we disillusion ourselves with pride over this purple democracy, perhaps we should consider what is instrumental to real freedom and democracy. The continuing focus in Iraq and Afghanistan, before we declare ‘Mission Accomplished!’ must be the solidification of security, basic infrastructure, education, and free press. Let us not be fooled again.

Splicing McCain's 2008 Acceptance Speech with Bush's 2000 Acceptance Speech

2008-09-07T01:25:00.000-07:00

I'm sorry. Two daily show clips in a row. Smacks of laziness. But, come on, the RNC has provided so much delicious fodder for John Stewart's brilliant sense of humor. I insist this clip is worth it.

John Stewart brilliantly ripping apart O'Reilly and Karl Rove.

2008-09-04T13:37:00.000-07:00

John Stewart makes me feel warm and fuzzy. Please watch.

The Wackness of Movie Reviews

2008-08-20T22:05:00.000-07:00

A few weekends back, I went to see The Wackness with Mr. Zelmer and his girlfriend Ox. The movie takes place in 1994 in New York City. A lonely, unsure high schooler, Luke, who sells weed out of a vendor cart, begins exchanging the good stuff with a psychiatrist for his counseling. The psychiatrist is disoriented and troubled, and the two develop an uncomfortable but endearing friendship as well as a business (selling that chronic) relationship. Simultaneously, Josh falls for the psychiatrists' daughter, a confident, popular girl with fleeting interests. The movie is mostly a character study, and Ben Kingsley, as the psychiatrist, is captivating. Having sincerely enjoyed the movie, we were eager to read reviews to compare our opinions. Instead of fresh perspectives, however, the reviews never made it past the wading pool. They were far too shallow and caught up with the minutia. Perhaps that is a weak comparison. I doubt wading pools are ever caught up with minutia, but babies do pee in them.

The NY Times review complained about the overstatement of nostalgic items related to 1994. It also moans that Josh Peck, who plays Luke, didn't do a good enough job in one scene of conveying the tension between his outward affectlessness (which, by the way, is a word not even recognized by Microsoft Office) and the riot of feeling inside him. As valid as these criticisms may be, they seem to miss the point. I liken it to receiving a brand new Lexus on your 16th birthday, and complaining about a spec of dirt on the windshield.

Sweet Sixteen aside, are these complaints reasonable coming from a movie critic? Perhaps sitting down to watch a movie with the specific intent of criticizing it distorts the experience and amplifies seemingly meaningless imperfections. Quite aptly, they ARE called critics. However, I see a few issues with the conventional movie review. First, should the review's purpose be to espouse inadequacy no matter how insignificant? Many movie reviews are written with this intent. But, it is not necessarily useful to the reader.

Many times, the reader of a movie review is simply trying to inform their decision on which movie to see. Among readers who have yet to see a movie, criticisms on, for example, the inability of an actor to portray a certain struggle of emotions in a specific scene has no context. These readers would be alternatively better served with an evaluation of the enjoyment, emotion, excitement, and entertainment offered by the movie.

This kind of review would attempt to define the ‘entertainment value’ of a movie, helping a reader decide whether or not the movie is worth seeing. Or, in what context [with who] it is best seen.

So, to help usher in an era of user-centric movie criticism, I would like to found a new website: ReelReviews.com. Now hiring.

Charity and Moral Obligation

2008-08-01T01:50:00.000-07:00

A friend recently gave 25 dollars to UNICEF. He had been telling himself to donate for awhile, to no avail. With the guiding hand of inebriation, however, he championed children's rights worldwide with the triumphant click of a button...and his debit card.

Making a donation is simple and selfless. But, our conversation lead us to find much deeper, more complex issues in the decision to give. Among others, what is the purpose of your giving? To satisfy your own moral framework? To meet a larger moral obligation? For recognition? Recognition is a significant psychological barrier for many. With the donation to UNICEF, you are affecting children thousands of miles away in an undefinable and unseen way. Without recognition, incentive falls to morality. Moral giving quickly becomes a sticky issue. My friend brought up the following scenario:

You are on your way to an ethics lecture (can this be drenched in any more irony?) and walk past a lake with a baby drowning. You are faced with a decision. Either, ignore the cute, little water-logged bundle of joy, and continue on your way. Or, save the little guy. Saving the baby, however, means ruining your clothes and missing your lecture. If the person agrees that they are obligated to concede a day of productivity and, say, $200 in clothes, then, logically, they are equally obligated to donate $200 to save a child overseas.

This is an effective way of motivating charitable giving, but in my mind, the logic of this moral obligation doesn't stand up. Consider if, instead of walking by one drowning baby, you are subjected to this same situation, day after day, for a year. 365 babies saved, 365 days of lost productivity, and theoretically $73000 in clothes. How can you be morally obligated to save a baby one day, but not the next? Taken to the test, it seems that the rather innocuous moral obligation of $200 soon becomes an entire year's productivity and 73000 dollars.

So, on what basis can you find an indefensible and definable moral obligation to give? Perhaps, instead of seeking an overarching moral framework, giving must be predicated on personal choice and an emotional aversion to suffering. I haven't reached a conclusion, yet. Maybe a donation to UNICEF will clear my mind.

5 Reasons You Can't Vote McCain 2008

2008-07-29T19:38:00.000-07:00

If you're reading this, and you're in the top 1% of earners in America, totally disregard everything I say. How could you NOT vote for McCain?? For everyone else, here are some less than impressive tidbits on Mr. POW.

1. McCain worships Reaganomics. [Trickle down economics]

In the eight years of reign by big Dubya, 75% of America's economic growth has gone to line the pockets and deck out the private jet bathrooms of the top 1% of the income bracket. McCain consigns to the typical Republican recipe to spur growth: tax cuts. Putting aside the exaggerated rhetoric of the dueling campaigns, the Federal government's take of the GDP will be approximately 17.6% under McCain and 18.3% under Obama. A relatively paltry difference. More significant is where that 18-ish percent of the GDP comes from, and where it goes. McCain favors cutting the corporate income tax, and eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, which has historically prevented wealthier Americans from avoiding taxes. Thus, lower tax liability in the upper echelon, with the theory that this extra money will trickle down to the masses in the form of wage increases, et cetera. However, this extra money, especially in the era of globalization, rarely trickles down to lower income Americans. Instead, it is invested overseas or payed out to wealthy stockholders in the form of dividends.

For the 98% of Americans that make under $250,000 dollars, Obama's tax policy will provide far more savings.

2. McCain has vowed to appoint only pro-lifers in his judicial appointments.

John McCain has stated that his judicial appointments will be subject to a single-issue litmus test: abortion. In a 2005 article in the New Yorker, a powerful pro-life advocate said:

"I wanted a commitment from ... John McCain that if elected he would appoint pro-life judges to the Supreme Court. McCain, in private, assured me he would appoint pro-life judges."

A single issue stance on judicial appointments is closed-minded and dangerous. Essentially, John McCain has promised many well-qualified people that they will be categorically disregarded on the basis of their views on abortion. For everyone but the unborn children, shouldn't we be more concerned with a judge's impartiality and academic qualifications?

3. McCain wants free elections in Iraq, but disregards the Iraqis' basic needs.

McCain, following in Bush's footsteps, will bolster nation building policies aimed towards more free elections. However, this strategy is naive and has clearly failed. Sure, Iraqis with purple ink on their fingers voting for their next leader sounds great. But, it is ultimately only a semblance of democracy. Without focusing on basic human needs: security, education, basic infrastructure, and food, no 'free election' will accomplish anything.

Obama's foreign policy will focus on organic, incremental change and humanitarian efforts as a stepping stone to building the foundation for new successful democracies. Placating the American public with news of more elections in Iraq and Afghanistan simply doesn't cut it.

4. McCain is OLD!

This isn't as bad as it sounds. McCain is still answerable to an antiquated moral framework that discriminates and marginalizes. For example, McCain was absolutely baffled when asked if he thought it was reasonable that Medicare covers Viagra, but not birth control. Reasonable, intelligent, and utilitarian decision making can't happen at the hands of someone who is so constrained by his ultra conservative 'family values' base, that he can't even take a stance on the availability of birth control. Raging, 4 hour erections are a different story.

5. McCain will drastically cut valuable social programs, but still deficit spend.

Some programs that McCain pledges to eliminate:

Head Start funding for 340,000 kids

Pell Grants for 1.6 million college students (universities are for poor kids, too??)

Title 1 School Funding

WIC assistance which includes nutritional foods, nutrition education, and health screenings for 3.4 million low-income parents and children

But, don't worry, kids. Defense spending will see no cuts under McCain's iron fist.

Smoking By Yourself?

2008-07-28T22:38:00.000-07:00

This is my first foray into the blogosphere. It will be poignant, relevant, and...I'm full of shit.

It is a longer story for a longer time, but a brief version prefaces the dilemma I face. I am currently in a program that includes random drug testing. Thus, I am unable to indulge in black tar heroin, crack [whores], cannabis (indica and sativa strains!), and alcohol. As a result, I have had to become creative in finding new permissible self-destructive vices.

Speaking of which, I bought a hookah the other day. As with any new purchase, my shiny, black, new tobacco water pipe is delightfully novel. So, as I sit here listening to Futurehead's self-titled album, and chatting on AIM...I succumbed to my prominently displayed, enticing new vice.

So, after lighting the coal and packing the molasses drenched apple flavoured tobacco into my new 'bowl'...I am sitting here, alone, smoking. Puff after puff, I become increasingly dizzy. Dizzy with self-doubt. Smoking hookah by myself? Exactly how shameful is this? I will cease and desist and ponder this inquiry. Good night.