Friday, November 06, 2009

Teenage Pregnancy: My Selfish Gene Theory

I have been reading "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins recently. Considering my knowledge of genetics is rudimentary at best and my understanding of evolution is not much better I felt that it would be worth reading into these fields so I could hold my own in a conversation. I am about two thirds of the way through the book and it is enlightening. I shouldn't really call it a book I suppose, it is more like one huge argument by someone who is extremely arrogant and self important. That being said the argument is compelling and in the field of Ethnology, Dawkins is quite important. I am not sure if I want to read his newer books about religion because having seen his rants in movies like Religulous or on The Colbert Report, I cannot distinguish his view from that of Evangelicals. He is essentially an evangelical atheist. I don't care for those people on the fringe who have no interest in listening.
The interesting thing about The Selfish Gene is it doesn't just explain how using the gene as the evolutionary unit that evolution would take place but gives you the tools to think in a genetic-based-evolution way. By the third chapter when he frames a new experiment you cannot help but stop reading for a few minutes and think about the puzzle and try to use the tools gained thus far to work out a solution. It really teaches a new way to think. It isn't long before you start thinking about other things with regard to the selfish gene. So here is my completely uneducated evolutionary stable idea:

If we assume that men and women are dirt sluts until marriage and after marriage are wholly monogamous, then it stands to reason that evolution would favour genes that promote premarital pregnancy since after marriage if one partner is not virile/fertile than neither person can procreate. Whereas those who seek to impregnate/be impregnated before this switch in sexual behaviour from filthy sluttery to monogamy will be more likely to produce offspring.

Thursday, November 05, 2009

Kiva

Traveling around Academic Earth, which is a sweet website unto itself, I discovered a site called Kiva. For those of you who have never heard of Academic Earth, it is a website that has viewable lectures from a number of top rated schools in America. Among them are Princton, Yale, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, etc. Profs agree to have individual courses filmed and put online so people can watch them for free. The website lacks an interactive component where members can discuss the course but hopefully that changes in the future. I am currently watching a course from Berkeley called "Current Issues in International and Area Studies". This course is just a series of guests. The guests all seem to be pretty decent thus far which is good because the Prof kind of sucks.
Anyways Kiva, introduced by one of the guest speakers of the aforementioned course, is a website that helps hook people up with individuals in the third world who require micro finance loans to start their businesses. The pay back rate is about 97.5% which means that if someone were to look at the website as a donation system and not an investment it would mean for $500 you could be doing the equivalent of about $20000 worth of help. A lot of the entrepreneurs on the website seem to have genuinely decent ideas and the website has a decent track record from what I read. I haven't signed up yet, though I think it is a possibility. I urge anyone interested in the world of micro financing to take a look even if it is only out of interest. The minimum loan increment is $25, a lot of the loans guarantee against currency risk and many of the organizations have a long term perfect record. You could probably help out many people while the initial $25 remaining safe.
FYI, There are 'communities' on Kiva that allow you to both communicate with like minded people and coordinate your loans for the maximum benefit of a particular segment (gender, nationality, industry, etc.). Within these communities the group who has lent the most money? "Atheists, Agnostics, Skeptics, Freethinkers, Secular Humanists and the Non-Religious" with a distant second being "Kiva Christians".

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Free flights for baby and mother a bad precedence

A child was born recently on an AirAsia flight. To celebrate this, the airline offered the newborn and mother free flights for life. Does this not seem like it will lead to a load of cunning pregnant women to board planes when they are too far along with the hopes of scoring some free airline tickets? Perhaps I am overly cynical thinking that a mother would put the health of both herself and her unborn child at risk in the hopes of giving birth in the sky but, I think it would be hard to argue that at least some women out there did not read this news like a how-to guide.
All other airlines should produce a press release condoning these actions and reiterating their policy limits on how pregnant someone can be on their flights to preempt any of these attempts.

Sunday, October 04, 2009

How to end global warming the horrible way

Now I say all of this tongue and cheek. That is to say I do not necessarily think that this will work, nor do I suggest people follow my advice but try to see within the content the point that I am trying to make, which is, that by and large any problem in the world today is essentially the fault of the baby boomers. I am not forgiving the transgressions of people born prior to the baby boom nor am I saying those who are younger are all innocent and just hapless victims of the social and environmental ills we see but simply that as an over-sized group-I am referring to both their waists individually and their numbers en mass-of people who were among the first to wield an influence great enough to affect the whole globe that they are the ones who are most at fault.
It is our (assuming the average reader is similar in age to myself) parents generation who, benefiting from years of unprecedented growth-mostly because of a legal structure that ignored things like environmental degradation or human exploitation-learned to take joy in excess. Whereas our grandparents found social acceptance in being as frugal as possible-because of the depression or to help the war effort-our parents find acceptance in keeping up with the Jones. I am not speaking about my family nor about any individuals but rather about a demographic group. These baby boomers have managed to take all that their progenitor's squirreled away and spent it, along with their personal earnings and since that wasn't enough to satiate their hunger, they are now taxing the future as well. I laugh at middle aged people on right wing shows, like the programming on Fox News, who mention these issues when they speak about government bailouts while ignoring that it is their generation who is causing all of the problems.
Now my suggestion is simple. Withhold love to your individual parents regardless of whether or not you think they are to blame. Redirect all of your affection toward your grandparents because they were the models of frugality that perhaps the world needs. See how long it takes the leaders of your nation to enact government policies to help correct these problems when you are bartering with their child's love.

Friday, September 04, 2009

Classic TV on Youtube

For whatever reason people have chosen to upload classic television shows to Youtube and for even less of a reason I have chosen to watch some of it. TV sucked back then. It had no edge, no meaning, was overtly religious and the fact that the show had no long term storyline meant that nothing exciting could happen and reasonably be concluded inside a 20 minute time slot.
One of the shows I have been watching recently is Family Matters. It is the perfect show to watch while studying since you only need to watch about 30 seconds an episode to know what is happening and watching anymore is actually detrimental to your enjoyment. Anyways one of the things I noticed is that Judy (Jaimee Foxworth - who is actually a porn star now FYI), the youngest sister, was just written out of the show without warning. If I were writing the show I would have had a conversation like this later on...
Harriette (mom): I sure miss Judy around the Christmas season
Laura (older sister): Yeah, to bad she got herself addicted to heroin and was stabbed to dead on skid row last year.
...or something like that to give the viewer an explanation. Make it really casual, like regular conversation, then move on the the stupid clown-like humour of Steve Urkel as though nothing was said. Now that is comedy.

Obama Talks to the Children

President Obama is celebrating the new school year with a speech directed at the all the grade 7-12 children in America. The topic of his speech will revolve around the future of education, staying in school and inspiring the children [to do what?]. Not surprisingly this speech has garnered a lot of criticism from the right. Jim Greer, Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, is quoted as saying:

"The address scheduled for September 8, 2009, does not allow for healthy debate on the President's agenda, but rather obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our President's initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates."

This comment is pure hilarity. By saying that the kids will be ostracized if they disagree with the president, he is conceding the fact that the vast majority of children and educators alike already support the president and his mandate, therefore it is not necessary to try and 'obligate' the children to agree with his reforms; whatever that means. Thank you Mr. Concession.

One of the user comments following the article on the yahoo! news server really shows how ludicrous the arguments against Obama's speech really are;

""I sent my children to school to be educated NOT indoctrinated." — justamom"

The author, a concerned [albeit retarded] mother, is worried that her children will somehow be mesmerized by Obama's speech and become some sort of Democrat-for-life. To this I would say that the whole point of the education system is to indoctrinate the youth. Now, admittedly, my personal experiences come from Canada, but I think in general the process is the same around the world. Taken to the extreme we have the religious schools who are clearly there just to turn out a new generation of worshipers but, all schools are trying to produce a group of kids who will vote in a block. I cannot think of how many times I heard teachers say things like "If the Conservatives win, that is it, I am retiring. I don't need another four years of their BS" (Mr. Cinani said that one specifically for anyone who went to my high school; though similar things were muttered by most teachers).
Why do teachers do such things? Because of a moral rectitude? No. At a Catholic school most teachers would be morally obliged to vote for the Conservatives (though I disagree with the logic), so it is clear that it is out of their own self interest. Since Liberals (and Democrats) tend to support teachers with higher pay, more resources and most prep time, supporting them at all costs is a great way to have their workload lightened while simultaneously increasing their pay.

Let the president speak, have faith that your children will consider what he has to say and make their own decisions as to its validity, and accept that this is the nature of the education system. Besides, most high school students will be legally able to vote in the next federal election and should start watching politics now so that they are a) politically interested and want to vote and b) have gained some immunity to the tripe that spills out of the mouths of most politicians and have built up a filter to tell the difference between rhetoric and reality.

Tuesday, August 04, 2009

Nanananananana Flame Wars (you know like the Bat man theme)

Decided to post a complaint (written below) about the shoddy writing of an article in the Washington Post. The story was about how men like the A/C lower than women. Because that is news. Anyways the guy made a comment about how "women are from Venus and men are from Freon". Leave the humour for the intelligent. Anyways below is what I wrote.



You are pretty much the worst writer I have ever seen linked to the Yahoo home page. This includes the immense amount of ticker writers based in non-English speaking countries.
Why would you go with the men are from Mars, women are from Venus comparison then change it to Freon? Clearly the analogy fits considering how hot Venus is and how cold Mars is.
You could have said this in a different way or made it a literal statement but you chose to add your own wit only to find it is lacking.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Numerology

So I realized that today is the 10th anniversary of me getting my learner's permit. Man am I old?! Also My Birthday is 3/16 and as of today I am 316 months old. Is that crazy or what? I mean to sit down and think about something like that on the day that it comes due.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Bad birthday present or worst present ever?

Japanese people are extremely rude about weight. I think it is one of the reasons why they are so small on average. Imagine school yard bullying that lasts your whole life. Well on my last birthday I experienced this first hand. Someone who wanted to buy me a birthday present asked me what I want. I told her I didn't want anything; we aren't exactly friends and frankly I did not want to feel obligated to reciprocate. Although in hindsight the gift I received would be nice to replicate. She asked me if I wanted a belt so I said alright (my current 100 yen shop belt was fraying). Afterward she asked me what my waist size is and I told her 32. It is actually 31 but I prefer 32 belts because they tend to cover the 30-34 range which is where I have been for the last decade. It makes me feel better knowing that I can gain and lose weight without worrying about buying new clothes, I suppose. She then told me that I was lying and bought a 38 belt for me. The smallest hole is a 34 which is currently far too big to be useful. This is not surprising given the fact that she has taken it upon herself to call me "metabolic" recently which is Japanese English for fat. To this I say it is like the cow calling the horse obese. So I ask you bad present or worst present?

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

My Response to The Economist's Online Debate

"This house believes that retirement in its current form should be abolished."

Dear Madam,

The current pension system is in shambles. Developed nations around the world are slowly going bankrupt trying to cope with more people exiting the workforce through retirement than entering it; less workers caring for more retirees. This is worsened by the fact that life expectancy is rising which means that they are collecting their pensions far longer than before. One option is to abolish the legal maximum age of employment. This would allow people to continue working thereby adding more to government pension plans and withdrawing less. This looks great on paper.
However if we chose to abolition maximum retirement ages there are some caveats to consider. Those who will be least willing to retire are high ranking executives, essentially closing off the best jobs to the more efficient youth. Especially in the world now, everyone needs to be aware that anybody born a few years after them will be more integrated in the global digital system than his or her elder. I am sure everybody under 30 has experienced their boss spending hours explaining how to do some 'new' technique in Excel just to think about how you figured that out yourself in high school or university. Perhaps in the past it was necessary to keep the older people on hand as long as possible because of the nature of education through apprenticeship. Not to mention until about 1800 technology did not change nearly as quickly so the longer a person practiced his or her trade the better they would be at it; they didn't have the concern that at some point down the line everything will be different and they will have to learn the whole system again.
This could also lead to a greater concentration of wealth. If a parent can stay active in a company as a senior executive long enough, it makes it much easier to pass on the position by nepotism to their child; despite a 20 or 30 year age difference. Especially when you add to the fact that salaries and bonuses are quickly rising in their share of the remunerations the wealthy receive. If people were able to collect these funds for an extra 10 - 15 years think about how many more legacies there would be.
Anybody who has given up on his delusions of grandeur but has enough savings to afford him or herself a reasonable retirement will opt to do so instead of working a menial, dead-end job with little chance of further promotion. Add to this list people who work physical labour, or are in decent unions, and have the option to retire early for a percentage of their full pension. Add the people who barely make their respective national governments stipend.
When considering such a radical change one must consider who it will benefit. Simply allowing people the chance to work longer will not necessarily lead to them doing so. Since anybody can chose to retire at any age up to the limit already, perhaps they will still do so. Those who do keep working may not necessarily be the people we had hoped would continue.
Will this measure be fair and proportional? It doesn't appear so. In fact it is likely that this would be the first step in destroying a pension system that millions of people rely on. If the maximum retirement age is raised, will the minimum age to receive a pension decrease? Do we chose to coax people back into working with some tax benefit?

View the whole Debate here.

Monday, June 08, 2009

Stupid Formulaic TV

I recently watched the first episode of a new TV show, "Royal Pains" and boy was I pissed. This had to have been the most formulaic show ever conceived. Basically the plot is this:
A doctor is fired from a New York City hospital because a Trustee died under his care, following this his fiance leaves him and he finds himself poor and alone. His brother decides to take him to some swank party in the Hamptons where he manages to save some person's life. This promptly lands him the role as 'concierge doctor' to the Hamptons.
Or put another way, Time Magazine's 50 Hottest Guy Alum who hates rich people and has an attitude is dragged by his brother, of "Road Trip" fame, to the Hamptons to interact with the rich. His keen skills and inability to play by the rules are 'House-like'. The Hamptons are in the throws of their beach season which makes it appear very much like the "Beverly Hills 90210" of old or "The O.C.". In fact the whiny song at the end falls just short of going "New York here we come" in a complete rip off of Phantom Planet's tune at the start of "The O.C.".
So we have the doctor drama mixing with the rich people with the rebel from out of town genres meeting in what will probably end up being the most popular show in America ever! It's not surprising that this show was written by two staff writers. Clearly no outside creative force was necessary to come up with this. Also the question of how can people get away with this type of drivel is clearly that it is actually what the average person wants.

Saturday, June 06, 2009

The Lottery

A young, poor, rancher boy in America has won one of the largest lottery prizes ever. Now in some ways it seems really nice that someone from one of the poorest counties in America has won the lottery but that is just the surface.
The real travesty is that someone who has allegedly had to rely on the kindness of his town's folk for charitable aide would feel it prudent to spend $15 on lottery tickets. In reality if everyone were to be rational only the absolutely wealthy would win the lottery: they are the only people that have the disposable income to waste on things like lottery tickets.

Saturday, May 23, 2009

In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto, Michael Pollan

Michael Pollen's newest book has really changed my opinion about food. I think that I am someone who is more conscious of what I eat than the average person. Although I am not the healthiest person, nor do I consume only the best foods but I am someone who thinks about what I am going to consume and am generally aware of what I am eating. Even before reading this I have thought that the level of processing is a better indicator of a food's healthiness than how much of each of the macro nutrients it includes.
The first piece of advice that ever took to heart about being healthy was to shop only on the periphery of a supermarket; the produce, bakery, dairy, and meat sections of the store while avoiding the centre aisles. Although Michael Pollan argues this is a good starting point he warns that "You are what you eat, eats too". In this respect the meat that we consume is far less healthy than it was before. Now, like people, our cattle is living off of seeds. Most of the animals we husband (can you say that?) are now raised on a high calorie diet of grains instead of its natural diet of grasses slowly consumed over a day of grazing. The fact that our animals are now eating food with more calories and a less rich spread of micro nutrients and who knows what else, after all we do not yet know everything in our food that people actually use and what is turned into waste (I mean shit), means we cannot expect modern cattle to be has good for you as say the meat 50 years ago.
The other thing that is worrisome is what comprises our food. Have you looked at the ingredients label on something like yogurt or bread? These are foods that our species has been consuming for thousands of years with positive results. But now these products have all sorts of crazy things in it. This all comes from the repeal of an American law regarding food standards
The 1938 Imitation Rule (repealed in 1973) "There are certain traditional foods that everyone knows, such as bread, milk and cheese, and that when consumers buy these foods, they should get the foods they are expecting... if a food resembles a standardized food but does not comply with the standard, that food must be labeled as an 'imitation'." Reinstating this law would be a good step toward reducing obesity.
This is what worries me about eating now; even if you stick to what appears to be whole foods you are not necessarily consuming real food stuffs. Is it possible to avoid all of the chemicals?
What if you decide to try for the more natural approach of free range? "'Free range' doesn't necessarily mean the chicken has had access to grass; many egg and broiler producers offer their chickens little more than a dirt yard where nothing grows."
Michael Pollen finally summarizes our human condition by stating, "The human animal is adapted to, and apparently can thrive on, an extraordinary range of different diets, but the Western diet, however you define it, does not seem to be one of them"
A really easy and interesting read. As an added bonus, there are a lot of interesting resources available at the back and I recommend it to everyone.

Friday, May 22, 2009

Last Call

I recently returned to Canada to visit family and friends. While home I invariably went out to the bars and noticed something immediately: last call. Last call is something I have not had to deal with in Japan. I believe the intent of last call is to help monitor the behavior of Canadians. My guess is the assumption is this "if bars cannot serve alcohol after 2:00, people will drink less and go home earlier thereby reducing the harmful externalities of drinking". Now in reality I think the story goes more like this: People see they have a limited time to drink so they ply themselves with alcohol early to guarantee themselves a healthy glow by the end of the evening. The fact that they are drinking quickly means they almost certainly over consume because they do not give the alcohol time to work its magic before drinking even more. Then at 2:00 a whole slew of inebriated people are set loose at the same time where they can interact; causing damage to nearby property, inflicting pain on themselves and others, drive under the influence (surrounded by others doing the same), have (I am assuming) unprotected sex and eat a bunch of highly suspect street meat to the detriment of their GI tracts.
Whereas in Japan, if you want to go to a club until 6 or 7 (or 8 or 9), it is wise to be quite parsimonious with the alcohol to make sure you aren't the guy sleeping in the corner of the club. Not to mention you have no need to drink quickly so you almost always know when you have had enough. People filter out of the club evenly throughout the night so the streets are never overrun by the drunkards.
I ask you, which system is better?

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Ben Stein

I recently watched Ben Stein's movie about intelligent design. I thought it would be entertaining to watch; mostly in an ironic way. That being said I went in with low expectations about its core arguments for intelligent design. But when I watched the teaser online, back when it was first being released, it was portrayed more as a documentary looking into why there isn't a debate between intelligent design and evolution as opposed to, what it turned out to be, an argument for intelligent design.
From the onset his arguments were weak at best and hypocritical at worse:
If you do not know exactly how life first came into existence doesn't it make sense that God (with emphasis on the singular form of the noun) create it? This of course ignores the further issue of how did said God come into existence?
I enjoyed the fact that the priests interviewed argued that religion should not supplant science and that the Catholic Church has reconciled itself with modern science; including evolution.
I will say Richard Dawkins is a douche. I am in possession of at least one of his books but am not really sure if I want to read it anymore.
Ben Stein's mocking tone of some of the theories about how life first came into being is hardly appropriate for a documentary and really puts him on par with Bill Maher; not a compliment.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Earth Hour: Waste of Time

According to the Orrilia Packet, one of the best newspapers from Northern Ontario (ha ha), Earth Hour was a colossal waste of time. Apparently it produced a 'negligible' reduction of Ontario's carbon footprint. Like most hippie plans it was a lot more showy than worthwhile to begin with, but it could have done a load of good for our energy supply.
In the long run this, now, annual event could encourage people to conserve everyday. There are many ways to conserve energy with no impact on our standard of living.
But anyways, the power companies coped with the reduced demand for electricity by reducing the amount of hydroelectric energy produced. Since this is one of the greenest energy sources, though conservationist may not agree, there was no reduction in the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere.
How is it that with so many people around the world wanting to participate in Earth Hour, Ontario energy companies didn't respond by reducing their dirtiest energy for the duration?
Shame.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Xmen Wolverine philosophy

Okay so I just watched Xmen Origins: Wolverine via the Internets. It was pretty cool. Actually it was a pre-release edition so not all of the editing was complete. There were editor notes throughout and much of the CGI was unfinished. Anyways, this experience has led me to a philosophical question that I would like to pose:

"Being invincible necessarily limits a person to a single, predisposed, hair style for life"

Discuss.

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Buying panties in Saudi Arabia

Saudi women are finding themselves in an uncomfortable situation. Because of the laws forbidding women from working, they find themselves having to buy their panties from men. This is further exacerbated by the fact that women are not allowed to leave the house without a husband, brother or father in tow.
According to the article, ""Even in such open regions as the U.S. and Europe, men do not sell underwear to women," said store manager Husam al-Mutayim, a 27-year-old Egyptian. "I don't let any of my female relatives buy underwear from men. It's just too embarrassing.""
I wonder how these women would feel about the knowledge that in Japan people can not only buy their panties from a vending machine but they can also buy the used panties of a
school girl.

Saturday, March 07, 2009

Rush Limbaugh

I am surprised that no one has killed Rush Limbaugh. First, I am not recommending it, I do not think that murder is ever justified, nor do I think that I would ever go as far as to say, someone deserves to be killed.
That being said a large portion of highly partisan and hugely influential people have been killed. Some of these people were more polite and reserved than Limbaugh. Some were less known than Limbaugh. Certainly most upset a smaller group of people than Limbaugh.
When I think of someone like MLK being shot while Limbaugh doesn't even need to live in fear, I get quite cynical. The NRA is a very right wing organization, Limbaugh is far to the right and MLK was far to the left. Of course political killings will be from the right to the left. They have the guns!
On the other hand, MLK was really a single argument man. He just wanted civil rights and equality. Limbaugh is not just partisan on every possible issue you can think of but also rude in so many ridiculous ways. Think about how he mocked Michael J. Fox for having Parkinson's disease. Surely some NRA people have mothers with Parkinson's disease?
It is a testament to the nature of America, for better or for worse, that nobody has shot Limbaugh. What should we take from this? Perhaps we can be the optimist and say that America has just become safer for political dissent, that freedom of speech is more cherished and people are more democratically enabled to say what they think without fear of persecution. I imagine MLK would prefer that story. Though, you can't help but think its because Limbaugh is a right wing fanatic and not a left wing fanatic.

Friday, February 27, 2009

Academic Earth

Academic Earth is one of the coolest websites I have seen in awhile. It is a new start up from some recent Yale (I think?) graduate. Essentially, many Ivy League schools film their lectures and put them on their website. That way a student who has missed a class can watch the podcast. Some of these classes are given weak copyright protection so that someone can use and distribute the video, provided they do not exploit them for profit. Well this Yale Alum decided to collect the videos available and put them on a single website. People are able to watch videos on a variety of different subjects coming from highly regarded universities including MIT, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Berkley. As of right now there are perhaps 100 full courses on the website but I am sure in the future there will be a lot more. There is a clear bias toward economic and political topics that is probably because the founder was a business grad. From what I have seen so far, I think that Princeton may have the best professors around; though there is a very famous physicist from MIT with videos online.

Monday, February 23, 2009

The Accidental Theorist - Paul Krugman

This book is amazing. It is a little dated (at times it discusses the possibility of a European currency) but the essence of the book still rings true. The book, published after Bush's first electoral victory, discusses a myriad of issues, not the least being the folly of Reagan's supply side economics. The book comprises about 30 shorts originally written for a few American newspapers and an online newspaper called Slate. Although Krugman is no longer writing for Slate it has a list of all his previous articles. There are also many other prominent liberal academics who currently write for, or have written in the past for, Slate. Krugman attempts to discuss economic theory using plain language that is designed to be understood by lay people.
If you would like to get two birds stoned at once, that is to say read one of the essays that epitomizes his style and check out the very cool Slate magazine, do so by clicking here.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

13 year old boy dies skiing

A Korean exchange student in Toronto died while on a ski trip to Snow Valley with his school. After the accidental death of the boy it was revealed that an $8 provision on the permission slip for the rental of a helmet may have saved his life. After the fact one parent said that she assumed helmets were mandatory. Why would someone say that? It's so clearly bullshit. Who reading this wore a helmet, or saw someone wearing a helmet, when we went skiing as kids? I can't for the life of me think of ever seeing someone on a ski trip wearing a helmet. I know that with the crazy style of snowboarding that is getting popular helmets are becoming more fashionable but they are certainly not to the point that a school board would make them mandatory. These parents are probably in their late thirties or early forties and should be thinking about when they went skiing. Were ski helmets even invented when they were kids?
Further to that the school board is defending its permission form with the opt in helmet program by arguing that parents carefully read permission forms and therefore were aware of the provisions. I highly doubt this too! Did your parents sit down and read all of your forms or just ask you what it was for? Did they even ask what it was for before signing it? Nothing like tragedy to bring out the worst in people.

Thursday, February 19, 2009

$75B for the stupid and careless

President Obama just announced a new $75 billion plan to help people who would otherwise have their homes foreclosed. It would be geared toward those individuals who have a mortgage greater than the current value of their home.
I am not one to support government intervention. I think that generally the government should only use taxation in its fiscal policy. That is to say it should influence the market only as far as varying tax rates can achieve. It should only help obtain economic equality with progressive taxation. That being said I do concede that, at times, expansive policy and grants may be necessary; that is to say the least bad policy. So in that respect I do not go as far as to feel my anti-intervention beliefs are a moral imperative.
So how do I feel about this? Well I will say that I like a lot of the major Obama stimulus package. Working to increase the national capital should pay off in the long run. For example, renewing the National Defense Network, along with other infrastructure, should help America regain part of their competitive advantage. It will create construction jobs now and more permanent jobs in the future. Putting money into research for future technologies including renewable energy resources should keep America at the forefront of technological improvement. So the main stimulus plan is, generally, well designed.
But I have a hard time liking this new stimulus plan. I understand that millions of people losing their homes could have an adverse affect on the economy. Further to that it may cost even more money in welfare and homeless shelters and all of the other burden on the social safety net associated with homelessness, than to keep them in their houses. All the same this plan is essentially the same as bailing out the banks. It is rewarding the careless and stupid; those who did not save money and/or bought houses out of their means with very small down payments. It sets up a bad precedence for the future: don't worry about saving or taking care of yourself because the state helps those who screw themselves.
The banks, in theory, employ those with a strong understanding of the economy to help turn a profit. So they should have known better than to lend to anyone who wanted to borrow. Further transforming said high risk loans into low risk derivatives was not kosher. But you cannot ignore the individuals who sought out these loans. Its not as though bankers accosted people on the street with sacks of money and a repayment schedule.
Its also not entirely the Bush administrations fault on the government side. Frannie Mae and Freddie Mac were encouraged to lend to anyone who wanted to buy a house by Democrats as a way of closing the gap of the Plebs and Plutocrats (working class and investing class; stray cats and fat cats; proletariat and bourgeoisie; ad nauseum).
This is also why housing prices shot up so quickly. Basically because of a new policy from Washington, the number of potential purchasers ballooned in an instant. This excess demand increased the value of homes across America. It also led to a construction boom which has now led to an excess of residences.
This is the folly of grandiose government policies. Something as innocuous as an attempt to raise up the poor in America helps crash the global economy. What could this current policy do? Well if I were a person whose mortgage was say $X and the value of my home is $X+Y, I may be looking for a Realtor who will tell me that Y is a negative value so I qualify for some of the relief funds. This could, though fictitiously at first, drive down the value of homes even more and lead to a further loss of faith in the economy.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Mac users should be a recognized minority

Mac users should be visible minorities with all the rights afforded to other groups under constitutions and charters around the world. Our glowing apple emblems are visible from far away. When some company does not support Mac formats (like yahoo internet radio), we should be able to chant OScism. I call an for an end to the world of hate that these corporate OScist have created.
If I type,
does text not appear?
Does my battery not drain,
If no jack is near?

Friday, February 13, 2009

Revelation

Having now experienced both, I can say with some authority that the literal knife in the back is way more painful than the proverbial.
I had to have a cyst removed from my back at a Japanese hospital. First thing I noticed was the cashier. Canadians, Europeans, Australians, etc, should not call their systems universal if they do not cover everyone in the universe. I think there is an opportunity for a class action lawsuit there. I am just saying.
My stupid insurance stipulates that I have to pay in advance then wait for the money to come back to me. So along with the cystectomy, which hurt so much, I had a walletectomy which I think annoyed me even more.
Want to be scared? Let someone who doesn't speak the same language as you cut you open while you are watching. Its a bad situation because we think of doctors as the most intelligent people around. Its where the trust needed to allow them to do such things to us comes from but how can you personally gauge someone's intelligence if you cannot communicate with them. Or, worst, weakly communicate with them. In Japanese they say push for both push and pressure (oshimasu) so hearing a doctor say "now pushure" does not inspire faith.
But the operation was a resounding success so I felt better after.
On the bright side, both the nurse and doctor were hot.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Will blogging ruin my life?

I don't think so, but then this isn't a blog about my intoxicated romps and sexual conquests. Are people so naive as to think that companies won't find their blogs when they apply for a job?

Monday, February 09, 2009

Unpaid overtime affects the labour market negatively

I am not one of those people that grumble if I have to work too much. Even with my current job, which is quite easy, I regularly come in before my shift officially starts to prepare my lessons, clean the classroom and get myself organized. I also tend to stay late to catch up on my students paperwork or reply to e-mails from the higher ups. But there is a point where this becomes detrimental, not just to your own personal life but, to society as a whole.
In good economic fashion, let's assume people who are paid a salary make more than those earning an hourly wage. So, perhaps, built into the salary is some allowance for unpaid overtime. Which I think is perfectly acceptable. You should try to go above and beyond expectations to prove yourself useful to the company that hires you. Further to that you can also think of putting in extra hours as a way to differentiate yourself from your peers as the better candidate for promotion.
However, working too hard for that future career is not always wise. If you put in an extra 20-30 hours a week (without pay) to move up in the company, the raises you receive barely cover the work you have already put in. It also means your boss has an expectation that now for an even better salary you will gladly put in even more hard work. It could be a bad precedence to set.
Paid overtime is a beautiful thing. I would happily put in 70+ hours a week if I received 150% pay for all of the extra hours; at least those in excess of what is a fair expectation of a salaried employee.
In Japan overtime is rarely paid. There is an expectation that you must do 'service time' before and after every shift. It also means coming in on the weekend when the need arises. Though there is no extra pay, it is a Japanese tradition to pay a bonus equal to 1-2 months pay twice a year so it may come out in the wash. During this recession, however, it is becoming clear that a lot of corporations are forcing people to work constantly. This is effectively driving down the hourly wage below the legal minimum.
Minimum wages disrupt the labour demand making unemployment higher than it would normally be. A lot of people argue that it is a reasonable limit to insure those who are able to find work are earning a living wage. But when the overuse of unpaid overtime occurs, there is no clear winner. Marginal productivity surely falls with the increased fatigue, unemployment still rises as fewer people are taking on the workload previously spread out and employees get burnt out; not to mention career satisfaction plummets. Although unpaid overtime is strictly illegal, corporations have been unhindered in the practice. Government enforcement during these times would help bolster employment numbers and keep Japan the world leader in productivity.

Saturday, January 31, 2009

Pat Quinn named governor of Illinois

Governor Blagojevich was finally removed from office. After attempting to sell former Senator Obama's seat to the highest bidder the Illinois Legislature voted unanimously to impeach. Blagojevich, trying to put things into perspective, went on a media tour, compared himself to Mandela and won the affection of Geraldo Rivera. What an idiot. How is being imprisoned for inciting a revolution against a racist legal system similar to selling a seat in the American Senate?
Regardless, Pat Quinn was a surprise choice to be the new Governor. Although he had some success in his early coaching career with the Kings and Canucks, and a notable career as both a player and coach in the minor leagues, he was never able to get the Leafs their much desired Stanley Cup. He has worked as a coach, manager and president of multiple sports clubs but this will be the highest position he has held with any organization. As the Governor of Illinois he will effectively be the highest ranked member of the Blackhawks' franchise.
(Did you see what I did there? Two people, one name. Very funny. I give myself two thumbs up)

Friday, January 30, 2009

Ted Haggard

Oh Ted Haggard you are a son of a bitch. There is very little that I dislike more than malicious hypocrisy. Being hypocritical is part of being human. I am hypocritical on a regular basis, but the difference is that, for one I do it in obscurity and, two its effects are generally esoteric in nature. I refuse to eat at McDonald's but I have no issue with the Japanese counterparts like Mos Burger. It is essentially the same (though I think there is a quality difference in the food they serve) so I suppose my vocal snub of one and admitted love of the other is quite hypocritical. Who does it affect? Me really. Who even knows? I suppose readers of this, a few friends in Japan, perhaps some in Canada but not so many that I would say I am a voice of the movement.
Ted Haggard on the other hand, does not live in obscurity. He is an extremely well known person. Add to that the malicious nature of his hypocrisy and I think it becomes very easy to find him repulsive. For those of you who do not know, Ted Haggard was the head of a very large evangelical church. He was also the head of the national evangelical congress of some 30 million people. As the head of this congregation he spewed his anti-gay hate speech on a weekly basis. Meanwhile he was carrying on a sex and meth for money relationship with a male prostitute.
He is now back in the news because of a documentary scheduled to be released on TV about his life. His fall from grace as it were. At least Haggard admits that he is a loser who deserves this.

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Iceland is way too competitive.

When America let Lehman Brothers go bankrupt Iceland, not wanting to be outdone let their whole country go bankrupt. When America bailed out their financial sector Iceland let the World Bank bail them out. But this competitiveness took a left turn. Iceland's government, which recently collapsed, is now being rebuilt with a new person taking the reigns as Prime Minister. Once again Icelander's competitive spirits have got the best of them. With America electing a Black President and Iceland wanting to be even more progressive have named Johanna Sigurdardottir. She is an openly gay politician. Well played Iceland. We'll see how long it take America to catch up to this one.

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Boosting rainy day sales at convenience stores

Umbrella theft in Japan is ubiquitous. Fortunately there always tends to be an umbrella in the stand to replace the own you had. Umbrellas have a wide price margin from 100 yen for a small clear plastic umbrella to several thousand for a retractable. The ones typically found in a convenience store range from about 300 yen (large clear plastic) to 1000 yen (vinyl with an automatic opening button).
When someone is caught in the rain without an umbrella they will typically do one of three things. The first being suffer the rain (though Japanese people tend to be far less willing to to this than Canadians), take an umbrella from a nearby stand or buy a new umbrella (likely the cheapest one available since most people already have more umbrellas than any individual ever needs. Since Japanese society tends to frown on all crime, petty or otherwise, taking an umbrella must be done in the least visible way possible. Although I have seen people walk by and outright grab an umbrella or place a broken umbrella in a stand and grab one in pristine condition this is not the usual ritual. One must enter the convenience store and make a purchase, then leave and grab an unsuspecting umbrella so it appears that they are merely taking the umbrella they placed in the stand moments before.
Now how could a shopkeeper with no scruples take advantage of the above information to increase sales?
What if the shop keeper had one of the employees steal umbrellas later in the rain storm when someone may be inclined to just buy a new one. If there is heavy rain and the person does not want to get wet they may buy a new umbrella upon exiting to find their umbrella stolen. That would mean the customer would effectively make two purchases and assume some random person snagged the umbrella.
Then when the rain is just lightly falling the stock person could put the umbrellas back in the stand. A light drizzle is unfortunate but someone may not feel inclined to spend a few hundred yen over a light rain. They may however want an umbrella enough to take one for free if possible. Therefore having a full umbrella stand at the beginning of a storm may drive the sales of everything else.
Since I often see very full umbrella stands at empty stores, I imagine this is one of the reasons.

Stupid CTV

Looking for somewhere to watch some streamed TV I stumbled upon The CTV. If possible I prefer to stream legally because the video quality tends to be a higher quality, the video tends to load quicker and legal websites are far more reliable. Unfortunately you can only view videos on CTV from a computer terminal in Canada. As annoying as that is, it is not enough to really upset me with CTV. What upsets me is they made me watch the initial commercial before the notice popped up that I cannot watch the video. I understand that these websites are subject to federal laws as well as copyright legislation and therefore are bound to only show video in the area they are expressly allowed to but should the warning not pop up before I have to sit through some shampoo commercial?

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Obama!

Obama has been sworn in as the President of The United States of America!
In hindsight, I have to say Bush wasn't as bad as everybody thought he was (Ahh using the past tense about him FINALLY). I mean he was divisive and incompetent but he wasn't evil. That role was filled by the person I am equally happy is out of office; Dick Cheney. I welcome Joe the Vice President into office as well. I think that he is a decent person whose presidential hopes were marred by his uncanny ability to put his foot in his mouth at every opportunity. Thankfully the Vice President has less chances to do just that and so I believe he will be effective in the traditional role as VP; that is to say Biden will roll back the changed portfolio of VP that the power-mongering Dick in office before him created.
The inaugural speech was very articulate. I daresay that Obama touched on everything that I hoped he would. From the social justice side, he discussed the reform of the education and health sectors. This is just one instance where it looks like he is willing to go forward with all of the sweeping changes he argued for from the beginning despite the current financial crisis. Others include the entitlement programs needing to be revamped. I really hope that he can fix these programs soon since the unpaid portion of liabilities in these programs are rising very quickly.
When dealing with these topics and others he was very much different than Bush in his attempt at being bipartisan; discussing that we should not worry about big government or small government but good government.
He discussed his plans for proper, peaceful, diplomacy; that he will open up to any nation who attempts to bridge the gap and show an end to their militant ways. This reaffirming of the need for so called soft power is a welcome change and will hopefully raise America's status in the world. He also discussed that terrorists are destined to fail if Americans refuse to let terrorist actions affect their lives.
On that note he echoed the sentiment of people like Locke and Paine in saying that America must not deal in its liberties to help keep the nation safe. To me it sounded like freedoms in America may be increased during the Obama years and perhaps Guantanamo will be closed very early during his presidency.
On the economic situation he argued that there will be some difficult times in the near future but people must let go of the paranoia the markets have inflicted upon them to return consumer expectations to where it should be.
Finally Obama discussed the need of developed nations to aide the development of the South. That we cannot sit back while other countries starve. That we can no longer ignore science with respect to things like climate change and that it is the developed world's responsibility to curve greenhouse gases. He foretold of a world where we harness the sun, wind and land to power our homes and drive our cars. It looks like Aide to disadvantaged nations and helping the environment will be two pillars of the Obama foreign policy plan.
Of course it is a little early to draw so many far reaching conclusions about the next 4-8 years of American governing but with the Democrats in serious control of the house and Obama being so very different than Bush one cannot help but get swept away in the moment.

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Sex Offender wins Rape Victim Lottery

Alaska hosted a charity lottery to support women support groups. Alaska has some of the highest rape rates in America, which makes the results of the lottery both more predictable and more alarming. The Winner? according to CNN the winner of this lottery is a former sex crimes convict.
I am sorry Alaska (personified), but this joke is just not funny. I get the whole Sarah Palin joke; it was a satire on the religious right. It was really a masterpiece.
The drill, baby, drill in the Alaskan wildlife preserve is not my cup of tea but I can see the audience you are playing to with that one. Ted Stevens was maybe my favourite joke. It was Norm Macdonald-esque humour done to perfection. Starting off with the stereotypically grizzly old Luddite who, ironically, chairs one of the most technologically advanced Senate committees was gold. Moving from there into an indictment on suspicions of accepting bribes was great. But the best part? That one of the bribes was an ugly statue of a fish! I love someone who can poke fun at themselves. The interconnection of all the jokes is well done - going from Stevens being corruptible to trying to remove barriers to drill to a bridge to nowhere was so seamless that I, for one, was begging for more. But, alas your humour took a turn I cannot support so, the important thing is not to overstay your welcome. You had a couple of hit jokes, your 10 minutes of fame if you will, but now it is time to lumber back home and stay quiet.

Friday, January 09, 2009

Why is Polygamy such a taboo?

Those crazy West Coast hippies did it again. British Columbia had been refusing to prosecute known polygamists for awhile now. Shockingly the culprits are not new age commune dwellers, likely because they do not believe in the institute of marriage at all, but Muslims being sheltered by Imams in the community of Bountiful.
Arguments in favour of prosecution say that BC cannot refuse to prosecute crimes because they believe that the federal law is unconstitutional; they do not have the authority to do such a thing. Conversely, there is a lot to say about the law being unconstitutional. Though the law is often said to be 'protecting' women and children it was originally created to keep the Mormons from moving to Canada. Since the purpose of a law is nontransferable there could be some weight behind the argument.
Is polygamy really that bad? Like most relatively harmless personal social decisions, polygamy would probably be better if it was legalized. The closed Mormon and Muslim communities in North America are a direct result of such prohibitions. They shy away from mainstream society because their lifestyle is considered unacceptable. The cloistered communities then become a breeding ground for sexual misconduct. Small communities with an excess of husbands relative to wives drives down the age with which women are considered marriageable. Add this to the privacy that such couplings require to stay out of the public eye and organizations that check up on suspected abusers in two-person marriages are either unaware of what is occurring or not able to get into the community to stop it.
Though polygamy is not for everyone, would it not be better to have it monitored than to have it done in secrecy where the only candidate for your third wife is your second daughter?

Sunday, January 04, 2009

Mars rovers mark fifth anniversary

Spirit and Opportunity, two robotic Mars rovers, are celebrating five years on the red planet. This is quite the feat considering they were originally designed for a 90 day mission. This either makes them the most reliable American made vehicles ever or the elaborate ending to some interesting game theory. Given the way the American auto industry is faring, I choose to believe it is the latter.
It is no secret that government organizations around the world rely on the central bureaucracy's budget for support. Some programs, such as primary education or health care, are quite visible whereas the benefits of science funding is not as easy to see. It can help lead to a more educated work force by promoting tertiary education or attracting highly skilled foreign labour which increases domestic production but since there tends to be a delay in satisfaction laypeople often do not see the benefits to taxpayer funded research.
This makes the funding of government departments focused on research more volatile. NASA may suffer the most from this volatility. They tend to focus on fewer, more expensive projects. Even the current mantra of 'faster, better, cheaper' may mean their average mission is smaller than a decade ago but still much larger than the research programs at government sponsored university labs. NASA also has a history of major failures to overcome. One such incident in 1999, saw a major Martian mission destroyed because the American scientists were dealing in imperial measurements while their European counterparts worked in metric. Then there are the more visible disasters involving space shuttles:

So how would an organization whose financial allocations are unstable try to expand their budget? Perhaps by making spectacular successes as well? Manned missions tend to get more attention by the general populous so sending people to the International Space Station may help garner a greater budget even though the scientific merits may be dubious. The photos of earth rising from the lunar surface taken by Apollo astronauts are still popular postcards that can be bought anywhere in the world. I am sure if NASA managed to return Man to the Moon they would likely see the huge budget required to step foot on Mars.
Alas NASA cannot run a pure publicity campaign. So convincing scientists is also an important step. Once science funding is increased they still need to compete with the likes of the National Science Foundation, its associated medical arm (taking money from cancer research requires one to be seriously cunning) and myriad others. So perhaps they could show that, although there are regular failures, an equal number of missions exceed their targets by extraordinary amounts. Or, perhaps, it is simply damage control. If the rovers lasted a mere six weeks and the targets were five years that would be a disaster but if the mission parameters stated 90 days then six weeks is, at least, 50 percent. Not bad.
Either way I like NASA and I am pretty sure their primary goal is to satisfy me which they have.