Categories
culture

Buying Local

There is nothing completely new in the premise of Scott’s Buying Local Saves? I’m fairly sure that I have heard stories almost exactly like this one:

. . . Kelly Cobb’s effort to make a suit of clothes using only resources available within a 100-mile radius of Philadelphia. ‘The suit took a team of 20 artisans [eighteen] months to produce — 500 man-hours of work in total.’

That should serve as conclusive evidence that you can prove almost anything with the right setup. Scott does a good job of illuminating some of the reasons that cause these kinds of results and calls into question the theory behind local-only shopping. The thing that held my interest is that I have preferences towards that kind of behavior, for some similar reasons to what he discusses.

There is a major difference though – I do not favor local products and services strictly for some moral good, and I don’t favor them in all cases. I think I would call my purchasing habits a pragmatic approach to buying local. I favor getting my hair cut at the local barbershop because I see no reason to pay my money to Great Clips or any other chain. I am especially pleased by the fact that the local barbershop is no more expensive, and I like the haircuts better than the chain stores. I also shop at the local grocery store rather than Walmart. I know some people who think Walmart is evil, but my reasons are much more mundane. I like the fact that the local grocer is not open on Sundays – I like to support businesses that don’t live in the 24/7 world of business. I also like the fact that the local grocery store is only one third the distance from my house as the nearest chain grocery store.

What it really comes down to is the fact that I have tried to divorce myself from the idea that saving a penny is always worth the cost. I save more in time, energy, and fuel by shopping local than I spend extra because their merchandise is 3 cents more expensive per item than Walmart. My favorite result of this new mindset is the freedom to look at things from more than just a checkbook perspective. It’s quite liberating.

Categories
culture

The Best of Times and the Worst of Times

I enjoyed reading Scott’s It’s Worse, but It’s Also Better and then I was surprised to hear on NPR a piece on how our society is Going Ghetto. It’s easy to get caught up in the idea that our culture is going downhill fast which is why it was so refreshing to read Scott’s take that there are some very positive things happening if we will look for them. I think that Amazing Grace is a good example of that.

On the other hand there is much that we accept and even promote which should be decried. That is what the Ghetto Nation is all about. I found it interesting that some people commented on the slightly racist connotations of the word ghetto as a failing of the argument being made. It is unfortunate if that charge of racism serves to dilute the power of the message being sent. Personally I would have used the word grunge – my grandma would have said “slouchy” – but regardless of the term being used, the argument is sound. We are shamelessly promoting some things which we should be rejecting or improving. When we would speak out against them we are told things like:

It seems to me that this demonization of everything ‘ghetto’ is representative of an underlying societal racism, equal to the way jazz and blues were demonized throughout the first half of the 20th century. (Comment by Katherine Ogilvie on the Blog of the Nation post)

While societal racism has no rightful place among us, I think she’s wrong (about ghetto, not about jazz and blues). It is not racist to speak out against something that is bad even if that something is often associated with a particular race. The arguments against all things ghetto are fairly applied regardless of race. The argument and the term are about a mindset which is unhealthy at the least and downright destructive at the worst.

Categories
culture life

All for the Love of Money

I remember being alarmed last year to learn about the number of people using negative amortization to finance their homes. In some areas it was over half of all home loans and the highest rates of negative amortization loans were nearly 2/3. Negative amortization comes in the form of an Adjustable Rate Mortgage (ARM) where the payments during the first years, before the rate is fixed, do not even cover the full interest on the loan so that after the three or five years when the rate gets fixed, the payments balloon and you owe more on the house than when you bought it. The bet for the borrower is that the house will appreciate more than the loan so that you can refinance.

At the time I thought of how that was a sad way to get in to more house than you could actually afford. Today I found an article on foreclosures in the New York Times. The cause of these foreclosures is not necessarily negatively amortized loans, but it is because of sub-prime lending and a combination of careless borrowers and greedy/predatory lenders. Lest anyone think I am heartless, I think that the bulk of the blame – especially in the cases covered in this article – lies with the lenders.

I could rant about how disgusted I am about lenders who would capitalize on those who are least knowledgeable and least able to protect themselves or afford the losses that they face. Instead I would like to point to the root cause of this plague. It is greed – the love of money.

When I purchased my home I dealt with a mortgage broker who had my needs and values central to his decision making process. When I estimated what I could afford in monthly payments he cautioned me against estimating too generously. After pre-approving me for a certain level of mortgage he suggested that it might be to my benefit not to try to find the most house I could fit under the limit. The end result was that my payments are lower than I thought I could afford. I pay what I estimated that I could afford and I am paying off the house faster because of it. This is not the attitude displayed by the broker who would exaggerate your income to look larger to get you into a larger loan so that he can get a larger commission.

It’s too bad that we have so many people (not just in the real-estate business) who claim to provide a service but who only service their own pocketbook. The fact is that the broker has nothing to lose if you default on the loan. Generally speaking, the lender can recoup their costs between the payments you make and the money they get from the foreclosed property. The loss is almost entirely the borrowers loss, and in the case of most of these loans, the borrower does not know enough to protect themselves when dealing with greedy and knowledgeable brokers.

Categories
culture technology

Mixing Fax and Email

There was a time when I thought that fax machines were obsolete. The more I think about it, the more I conclude that they could be obsolete, but for some reason they aren’t (the same is true of pagers). Rather than arguing that they should be obsolete, I would argue that there should be a way for people to send a fax to an email address.

I am not talking about efax.com or any of the other services that you can sign up with (often for free) to have faxes delivered to your email. Those still require that you have a fax number. Someone sends a fax to your fax number (which is maintained by efax) and they route the fax to your email address. They can even convert the fax into a different file format, like PDF or TIF which can be read by software that your probably already have.

I m talking about a system, perhaps a device that could be connected to the fax machine, that could be used to send a fax directly to an email address rather than a phone number. This allows those that have legitimate uses for faxes to continue using them and have access to the many people who do not have a fax machine. While we’re at it, perhaps we should create some kind of software that can send any printable file as a fax – oh wait, we already have that in the form of fax software programs.

On a side note – this is another example of how technology leaps ahead of us and we have to scramble to keep up with what is available. This scrambling is what leads to mistakes like DRM and obsolete laws like traditional copyright and DMCA.

Categories
culture

Political Forgiveness

In covering the confession by Newt Gingrich concerning his affair of the late 90’s, CNN speculates that critics will call the religious right hypocrites if they forgive him for the affair when they are/were so critical of the infidelity displayed by Bill Clinton and Rudy Giuliani. I think there would be an element of hypocrisy to that scenario. On the other hand, forgiving him and voting for him are not the same thing. Some may forgive him and still not vote for him. Others may vote for him without forgiving his hypocrisy.

I know he claims that it isn’t hypocritical, but his logic is the same as the logic used to say that the Civil War was not fought over slavery. Certainly states rights was an issue in the war, just as perjury was an issue in the Clinton impeachment. That being said – common sense says that states rights would not have been an issue worthy of war without the slavery issue, just as perjury would not have been a problem for Clinton without the infidelity.

So if this admission is an attempt to clear the way for a presidential run I hope that Gingrich does not try to cast himself as a clean candidate just because he has paraded his skeletons in public already.

Categories
culture

Interesting Idea

So, this idea of a Redesigned alphabet is apparently not new. I was intrigued by the alphabet shown on Northtemple but I but I was less impressed by the font I found from the comments under the original post. The idea is interesting, and there could certainly be some interesting alphabets generated which have identical upper and lower case, but as proven by my links, smallcaps can simulate the effect with any font available so it’s not that hard to do. I’m almost tempted to make this post in small caps to prove the point.

Categories
culture life

Are Children Dumber Today Than They Used To Be?

Lest I get in hot water with all the parents out there, my short answer is “no.” Now let me explain the question.

I recently learned of a bill coming before the Utah Senate which would fund all day kindergarten throughout the state. Perhaps I am thinking of my own kids only, but I am convinced that all day kindergarten is not helpful to most students. For those who would point out that it is optional and not required I will say two things: first, when will that change, because our trend is towards adding requirements such as these to combat falling achievement results; and second, This post is not just about all day kindergarten. (Now on to what it is about.)

Forty years ago we had fewer after school programs, less technology in schools, and less emphasis on standardized testing. We also had higher literacy rates, better scores on math and science tests, and probably higher graduation rates (I could be wrong there – I have no data). If we add those two things together we should come to the conclusion that after school programs, more technology and emphasis on standardized tests are not the solution to the problem facing our education system. (They are great for the bottom line of some technology companies and some education companies who specialize in testing or after school programs.)

I don’t mean to imply that having computers and other technology in schools is bad, or that tests make kids dumber (I know some people who make either of those arguments) but we should see that they do not solve the underlying problem.

Another trend that I think has a greater impact on our education system than the technology, tests, and extra programs is this – the vast majority of students today come from one of two kinds of homes: single parent homes or two income homes. This was not the case forty years ago. The real problem confronting our society and manifesting itself in our education system is that children are not getting the care from involved parents that they used to get. They are getting more activities and government sponsored daycare solutions and less of mom or dad sitting down to help with homework, attending parent-teacher conferences, being aware of what’s happening in their lives, or even playing with them in the back yard. Our problem is homes which are nothing more than places to sleep and families which are all about blood relations with no thought about relationships.

Programs like all day kindergarten make it that much easier for parents to decide that they can both work and let the government raise their children. I admit that some people are in a position where they need outside help, but in most cases it is a matter of convenience rather than need. Society should not be burdened by the financial and social cost of funding a convenience. For those who have needs, we should be looking for ways to help their needs without making it convenient for others to go joyriding at our expense.

Categories
culture

Title Game Follow-up

I thought I would follow up to my Title Game post.

Basically, the talk of a Ohio State/Michigan rematch for the title game is an embarrassment for the Big Ten Conference. Both of them lost their BCS bowl games. I think that rust was an issue in both games. Michigan got outclassed by USC but they would have made that a close game if they had not been off for over 6 weeks. After 7 weeks off, Ohio State had no business on the field with a well-rested Florida team. This really does not reflect the quality of football team that Ohio State had this year. The moral of the story is, any team that has any hope of playing for the national title should make sure to have a game scheduled after Thanksgiving. This is no problem for the champions of the SEC, ACC, or Big 12 with their Championship games, but the Big Ten, Pac 10, and Big East teams have to think about this issue as they schedule games.

This should also serve as a warning against any title game that only represents one conference.

My personal favorite story line for this title game is the Urban Meyer coaching career. he turned Bowling Green around in two years then moved to Utah in a better conference. Two years at Utah saw him crashing the BCS party and moving on to Florida in a better conference. Two years at Florida and he was in the National Championship game – which the Gators won by 27. This puts him among an elite group of coaches who have won a National Championship within two years of taking over a program – a group that includes Jim Tressel at Ohio State in 2002.

My final take on the season is this – Florida will be #1, USC might get a vote as #1 from someone – they are likely to be the pre-season #1 next season, and I think someone ought to throw a #1 vote to Boise since they are the only undefeated team left even though they did not have a schedule that would make them #1 – they had only one non-conference game with a non-BCS opponent, and that was Utah(8-5) – even Florida played a Div 1-AA team.

UPDATE: Thanks to Greg Archuleta of the Albuquerque Journal I got my wish. Boise State got a vote as #1. It’s too bad the Coaches Poll had them as #6 because they are definitely a top 5 team.

Categories
culture National

Partisan Playground

Three days after the elections I get an email calling for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. It sounded a lot like playground politics. "You impeached our president so now that we are in control of congress we will impeach yours." I thought it was typical of staunch partisans that they would exaggerate their position from the outset. The email started with:

"On Election Day, the American people voted overwhelmingly for change." (emphasis mine)

I wonder about the threshold they use for "overwhelming." The fact is that if every race that remains undecided were to fall to the Democrats there would be 42 seats that changed hands in the House and the Senate combined. That is only 8% of the 535 seats in Congress. Only 6% of the Senate changed and 10% of the House. That sounds like a vote for change, but not an overwhelming vote for change. In fact, 25% of the seats that changed were still in doubt after 24 hours. (All the numbers I am using assume that every seat still in doubt goes blue.) To make this vote less overwhelming, the talk now is how the incoming Democrat representative are pragmatic and populist more than liberal. We really don’t know what to expect from this new Democrat controlled congress. See Update

I visited the forum where the email originated and found more level-headed thought being expressed. Things along the lines of, "President Bush deserves to be impeached, but it won’t accomplish anything positive in the country, so don’t bother."

Nancy Pelosi, likely the next Speaker of the House, has indicated that she will not pursue impeachment. Level-headed people from across the political spectrum will agree with her that impeachment is not a good course of action for the country at this time. The partisan impeachment proceedings against President Clinton should serve as proof of why we should not go down that road right now. At least when the Republican congress impeached Clinton they could be forgiven for having no memory of the last time we had an impeachment. This Democratic congress has no such excuse.

I looked around the forum site and they had a poll for people to vote on what they would like to see happen in the first 100 days of the new congress. They categorized the various suggestions. I discovered an interesting trend as I read the options. I found that I agreed or disagreed with them on a category by category basis.

  • Constitution & Courts
    • I disagree heartily with almost every option
    • I especially disagree with the constitutional amendments they propose
  • Economy, Business, Labor
    • I agree with some of the options
    • I am undecided on some of the options
    • I disagree with a couple of the options
  • Elections
    • I agree with almost all the options
    • I disagree with one option and think a couple of options are redundant
  • Energy & Environment
    • I am undecided on the majority of the options
  • Foreign & Military Policy
    • Many of the options sound like vague ideals rather than solid plans
    • I agree with their positions on torture
  • Government & Congress
    • I agree with most of the options
  • Investigations
    • Lots of redundancy related to the Iraq war
    • Many of the options sound like they are living in the past
  • Media
    • Sounds like a bunch of ways to expand government
  • Social Policy
    • Sounds exactly like the Democratic party line

This got me wondering what kind of people were running the forum. The answer came in a different poll they had. This one asked who they would vote for in 2008 for president. The answer was overwhelmingly Al Gore. He got more than 1/3 of the votes with 13 candidates in the poll. Hilary Clinton (supposedly the front runner) was not even in second place on this poll, she got less than 1/8 of the votes. So these are Gore Democrats. This is nothing against Al Gore, he merely represents one faction of the Democratic party. The question is, what do the Pelosi Democrats think, or what do the Dean Democrats (the official party leadership) think? Lest anyone see this as bias, Republican factions include the McCain Republicans, Frist Republicans, and Mehlman Republicans.

UPDATE 11/14: I just found confirmation of what I had said about how overwhelming this vote for change was.

The scale of this loss was on par with the post-war average for such elections: close to 30 House seats versus the average of 32, and likely six Senate seats compared to the average of eight.

In elections during which the president’s popularity was low because of war, scandal or recession, however, the average is 47 House seats and eight Senate seats.

This "overwhelming vote for change" was about average, if not a little below average for the current situation.

Categories
culture

Choose Your Words Carefully

As I was driving around today between the hospital and various other places I noticed a number of news articles about the verdict in the Saddam Hussein trial. Their titles got me thinking about the power of words.

One paper titled their article “Dictator gets Death.” Another talked about the “deposed Iraqi leader.” A story on NPR referred to the “former Iraqi leader.” Other news outlets talked about “Saddam Hussein,” “Saddam,” or “Hussein.” The thing that I began pondering was how those different references to the same event and the same person can elicit different reactions from the audience.

“Dictator gets Death” was probably chose for it’s use of alliteration (it would have been better for that purpose as “Deposed Dictator gets Death”) but it has the potential to make the reader think less of the defendant than a story about the “former leader.” The author may have intended to illicit that reaction or may not have intended any special reaction. Using words such as dictator and tyrant, which have subjective definitions and vivid connotations, can sway the audience to a particular side of the debate even when the facts are weak.

I have learned to be aware of the use of manipulative verbiage – even when I agree with the position – in order that I might avoid being swayed by an emotional reaction to the particular words rather than a logical reaction to the facts of a debate. I also try to avoid using terminology which will manipulate an audience when I am discussing an issue. I believe it is counter-productive to be clever with our words unless we are very careful that our cleverness does not interfere with our meaning.

This is not a complaint against any title. It is a reminder to me that there may be a million ways to say what appears to be the same thing but if we dig deeper we can discern that each of those million ways can throw is into a different mindset through which we filter the information we are receiving.