Police Force

Let me just say that I generally have a good opinion of police offices, but this guy sickens me.



It’s clear from the video that his use of force was unnecessary, and didn’t help the problem besides. The officer violates some basic arresting etiquette, such as telling the driver what he was charged with, and that he intended to arrest him. I heard that, many times, those with criminal-like pathologies join the police force, watching this video makes me believe it.

The use of force was completely unjustified; he calls the driver over, and then tasers him; it was clear that it wasn’t necessary, as the driver was argumentative but generally cooperating.

As Nicholas Provenzo at the Center for the Advancement of Capitalism said:

“The police officer was not clear about his intention to place the driver under arrest. The driver, albeit confused and mildly agitated, thought he was negotiating his citation throughout the encounter. The police officer did not refute this mistaken, yet not dishonest premise. The police officer did not indicate the offense the driver was charged with, or that any further discussion or debate should be saved for a judge. Lastly, the police officer did not in any way indicate that the driver's signing of the citation was not an admission of guilt, but instead allowed the officer to release the driver without arresting him.”

He continues:

“Knowledge of this incentive would likely have led to marked change in the driver's reaction. Instead, the police officer used his weapon to subdue a man who presented no immediate physical threat to him. I say his actions fit the definition of unreasonable to the letter.”

He also makes a good point on the practical use of force by officers:

“Furthermore, as part of the practical aspect of policing, the officer's conduct escalated the situation rather then subdued it. If I were his superior, I'd fire him for recklessness and unprofessional conduct.”

I agree with Mr. Provenzo. Beyond being unreasonable, the officer showed absolutely no tact in dealing with the situation; that alone disqualifies him to wear the badge.

I hope in the near future, this officer finds himself without one, as well as any officer like him.

For contrast, here is an officer that handles himself professionally in a much more stressful situation:

The Real Meaning of Christmas

Here is a writer who attempts to trace back the “real” meaning of the holiday.

Grocery Reform

Richard Ralston makes a case for National Grocery Reform.

He says:

“One of the great scandals of our age is the fact that America spends more on food than any other nation. Many political leaders are now calling for urgent reform to bring spending on food under control. Even worse, while the result of this uncontrolled spending includes the fact that many Americans are overweight, some Americans do not have enough to eat.”

What he proposes is a drastic change to the America’s Food System:

“To achieve savings by eliminating the profits of food manufacturers, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will assume ownership of all of these firms, purchase all crops from farmers (until such time as agriculture can be reorganized into government operations) and manufacture an appropriate amount of food.”

Of course, this food utopia can’t be built without a little sacrifice, he continues:

“In spite of the efficiencies and cost reductions that government management will achieve, there is some concern that food might not be affordable for everyone. And food is surely a "right," as it is necessary for human survival. Therefore all groceries made available in government commissaries will be free of charge. This will be financed by an increase of 15 percent in income taxes, except for those making over $80,000 a year, whose taxes will be increased by 75 percent. Because the supply of food is not unlimited, a fixed amount of ration coupons will be distributed to insure that each consumer can obtain an equal amount of food.”

Ralston makes some good points; it certainly makes as much sense as anything else being said today.

You can read the full article Here, or at Americans for Free Choice in Medicine.

These brilliant ideas have implications elsewhere, as Ralston admits in his own article. I’ll let him have the last word:

“Rumor has it that the clincher for those proposing socialized grocery plans was stated recently by one of the presidential candidates: "The ideal thing about these proposals is that if we can somehow get this to work for groceries, we can apply it to health care."

The World’s First Stand-Up Economist

Who said that economists have no sense of humor?



You can see this guys other videos at his website Here.

What’s caused by Global Warming? Just about everything.

Check out This List to find out more.

Each item on the list is a link to an actual site or article that makes the claim.

I wish Global Warming were more well-known when I was in high school, I could blame my failed history tests on it.

Creation Museum

Visit This Site to see some pictures of the Creationist Museum.

Did you know that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that life existed more the six-thousand-years-ago?

Oh, how facts and the scientific method deceive us all!

Real Life: The New Multiplayer Videogame

Have a hard time deciding what to buy your friend for Christmas, look no further then this brand new game:

Real Life

According to this review, Real Life is:

“….the most accessible and most widely accepted massively multiplayer online role-playing game to date. Featuring believable characters, plenty of lasting appeal, and a lot of challenge and variety, real life is absolutely recommendable to those who've grown weary of all the cookie-cutter games that have tried to emulate its popularity--or to just about anyone, really.”

You can do just about anything in this game, but make sure that it is your cup of tea before you buy, the review also says:

“Real life can occasionally feel like a chore. Some players legitimately dislike it, despite having attempted and even excelled at numerous career paths. Others externalize their frustrations by harming other players or, in some cases, even harming themselves. These players do have access to various support forums, and often end up whiling away the time by engaging in various available minigames or other competitive activities.”

Even so, Real Life is the game to beat this holiday season.

Conformity at Its Funniest

Elevator Candid, Must See... - video powered by Metacafe

Brainwashed For Hate

I’ll let this video speak for itself.

Technology: The Latest and Greatest

TIME magazine recently published this years best inventions; As you can see, the iPhone toped the list.

What struck me was the number of “green” items on this list, which would be just fine, except many do not belong there. According to the “how we chose the list” video, the editors chose things that 1) filled needs, or solved problems, that have not been before, and 2) must be real. Many “green” items were not built yet, and many others seemed insignificant or impractical.

I would hope that technical brilliance would play a larger role. If a person came up with a transporter device that ran on baby polar bears, it should still make the list.

Also, the list sometimes confuses the best inventions with the most marketable ones; things can be brilliant and currently unusable. Just look at the world’s first nanoradio, which will greatly improve our ability to build microscopic machines (which has enormous practical applications.)

One other thing that irked me was that, on the “Best Inventors” list, they did not include Heron of Alexandria, who invented the first steam engine over two-thousand years ago; or another Greek thinker, Galen, who invented medical techniques that weren’t rediscovered until the 19th century.

Ah Well, I guess I should just be happy that intelligence and technological progress are being rewarded at all.

The Economics of Exclusiveness

I was reading Thomas Sowells recent article, Prestige Versus Education, and something occurred to me. One of the points he made was:

“Some students may feel flattered that Harvard, Yale or M.I.T. seems to be dying to have them apply. But the brutal reality is that the reason for wanting so many youngsters to apply is so that they can be rejected.”

He continues:

“Why? Because the prestige ranking of a college or university as a "selective" institution is measured by how small a percentage of its applicants are accepted. So they have to get thousands of young people to apply, so that they can be rejected.”

This is not unique to big universities either, even preschools do it. Some prestigious preschools have waiting lists over seven years long, parents have to send in an application a year before they conceive.

Certain restaurants have two year waiting lists (for normal costumers) and enforce a strict dress and etiquette code.

The sunglass-hut sells Ray Ban glasses for 70 to 500 dollars apiece.

Ferrari produces certain “special editions” of their vehicles, producing only about a 100.

There is nothing wrong with this, and the items mentioned above are high quality; but they are also selling something more then quality: that being a sense of exclusiveness.

Ray Ban can mass produce their glasses and sell them for 30 dollars apiece; Restaurants, if the demand is that large, can expand*; Universities and other prestigious educational institutions can also expand, I’m sure that the 70,000 people who apply for NYU each year would love to get in.

This is where basic economics comes in; in all these cases, greater demand is being created by artificially lowering supply. Of course, demand is likely to be high anyway, because of the quality of what is being sold; the only way this works is if quality matches the hype, artificially lower the supply of Barbie-doll knockoffs and nobody will care.

There is nothing inherently wrong with buying rare items; as humans, we feel that there is something special in the unique. If diamonds began falling from the sky like raindrops, we would probably find another way to express our eternal devotion. When given the choice, most will chose an original painting at a higher price then a print (even if that print is a perfect recreation.)

Some will say that this is yet more proof that advertising and consumerism are manipulating the masses. Though it is probably true that certain producers fuel this desire, the economics of exclusiveness is likely in response to consumer demand, and not created by some malevolent producer.

This is where the old anti-capitalist argument comes in; where Dick, in order to be better then his neighbor, embarks on an obsession with the material, an orgy of unhealthy buying. I will say that there are people like this out there; but are these desires “created” by the producers, or an expression of something else?

Fundamentally, Dick is motivated by a desire to impress others, or gain a felling of superiority. Anthropologically speaking, both these are products of the desire for social approval. A sense of insecurity, or a lack of self, motivates Dick, not anything material. Those who think that pre-capitalist Europe or third world countries don’t produce people like Dick are fooling themselves.

It is important to separate a genuine admiration of the unique and the unhealthy obsession with the exclusive. We admire those in the Olympics because not everybody possesses great physical aptitude; the same way we admire great painters, singers, or a well-made diamond ring. In this sense, the desire for the special is actually healthy.

Though there are unhealthy desires for the special. Is NYU worth 10 times as much as a local state college? Are Ray Ban sunglasses worth several times as much as ones you can find at your local drugstore? Is it worth it to buy an original Monet and not a good print? Quality and greater monetary value does not necessarily equal greater personal value. Is my desire to acquire this thing a respect for the great and the unique, or just a need for the exclusive and validation?

These are two completely different desires that, on the surface, appear to be the same. One needs to know their own personal motivations, and be careful not to confuse hype with reality.

-Ryan


* Restaurants often sell a particular chef, one that personally cooks or oversees all the food in the kitchen; so there is a physical limit to how much they can produce; trying to expand would likely change the meal, if ever so slightly. So there is good reason for the exclusiveness of some restaurants.

Veksler on the Future

There is an excellent article by David Veksler about the future at Truth, Justice, and the American way (link to the right.) The article is entitled: Our Techno-Utopian Future: Fallacies and Predictions.

It draws heavily from the works of Ray Kurzwiel and the like, but still offers many new interpretations to the mix; like that our sense of self will be expanded, not contracted, by future technologies.

He does talk about the increased capacity of future people interfacing with computers, but does not mention that, with increased capacity comes increased expectation. New plateaus are reached, if everybody suddenly became twenty-times as strong as they are now, we would not limit ourselves to our formal activities, but expand on them (the Olympics, for instance, would change and expand, as with many other activates.) So those who think the future will be a breeze, with the ability to download information into your brain and lose weight with a pill, are wrong.

It is worth reading, for a quick overview on some of the legitimate worries, and not-so-legitimate worries, and why the future is something to be very optimistic about.

Urban Gymnastics

The best way I can describe this is free-style acrobatics. It is not properly defined as an extreme sport, nor fully a martial art, parkour encompass a great deal into its rather vague set of goals; ultimately, I think its purpose is to have fun.

Pankour stresses freedom of movement, understanding of the body and limitations, and split second reaction time. According to some, it is the art of moving over obstacles as efficiently and as fast as possible.

There is information on Wikipedia about it:

There are also several good Youtube videos that showcase it here, here, and here.

The closest thing I can relate it to in my experience is talus running; this is a technique favored by rock climbers to build up reaction time and foot speed, it involves running very fast over rocks or an uneven surface. There is also the climber concepts of the ballerina, the cat, and the monkey, that parkour seems to have adopted; these three disciplines is how a climber is supposed to face any given situation (jumping like a ballerina, landing like a cat, and using your limbs like a monkey.)

All the people in the videos above seem to use the same techniques, to an amazing affect, it is incredible what they are able to do, and the distance they are able to fall safely is simply amazing.

Like many disciplines, this one is heavy on metaphor. Proponents of parkour claim that defeating physical obstacles can help you defeat other obstacle in life; from relationships, to work, to emortional problems; they even claim that it helps your critical thinking skills. The Pankour philosophy stresses constraint, to know ones limitations and not to push too hard. Pankour experts say that, Because of this philosophy, there are very few pankour accidents, which is surprising considering what they do.

I'm skeptical that parkour has that many benefits, but as for a fun pastime that helps flexibility, reaction time, and understanding of your body (not to mention exercise), I think parkour is the next big thing.

Gore criticizes Bush for ignoring Iraq's ties to terrorism

This is Al talking in 1992 about the terrorist threat from Iraq. He makes a good case; we better take out Saddam!

He strongly criticizes the first Bush administration for ignoring the Iraq contribution to terrorism, also saying that they are lying to the American public and manipulating people to support this denial.

It’s odd, he is using the same arguments in 1992 as he is using now, but to the exact opposite purpose.

In his book, the Assault on Reason, Gore criticizes the American people for buying that there are ties to terrorism within Saddam’s Regime.

Did he say any differently back when the issue was relevant? No. Apparently, Al was part of all us sheeple believing what the great manipulator, the media, was telling us; and not the lone voice of reason he likes to think he is.

A Review: ‘The Invisible Heart’, by Russell Roberts

I always thought that free-market enthusiasts got an unfair shake when it came to `Matters of the Heart" (free-marketers get a bad shake on almost everything, but especially this.) For too long, `love' and `caring' have been concepts monopolized by the John Lennon's and Michael Moore's of the world. Now, Russell Roberts has formed a romance that finally does justice to the 'romantic free-marketer.'

The story follows Sam Gordon, an economics teacher and a passionate supporter of free-markets, and Laura Silver, and equally passionate professor of literature (who-by the way- is the `anti-Gordon' when it comes to markets.)

Perchance these two meet in the subway, and not so surprising considering there viewpoints, a debate ensues. Despite very different opinions, they find they enjoy each others company.

There is also a nice parallel story about Charles Krauss, a corrupt CEO of a pharmaceutical company, and Erica Baldwin, an employee at the `Office of Corporate Responsibility', who is trying to bring him down. There is a pleasant surprise concerning this story-line (which, for any who know about Russell Roberts, feels odd), which I won't ruin.

All this cumulates to the end where, after many debates, politics, and courting, it all comes down to a very satisfying ending. It is fair to say that this story is about two main things: Love and Economics; but I don't want to imply that the characters are forgotten, each character Robert's develops is suitably complex, the characters feel real and sincere, as does their romance.

What is so delightful about this book is the breezy and fluid way in which it is written; Robert's moves from international economic theory, to relationships, to politics and scheming, all without missing a beat.

The portrayal of the characters is also a strong point. People with different viewpoints are not seen as villains in the context of the book; Robert's makes a point that Sam and Laura are really like-minded people, despite there different viewpoints.

`The Invisible Heart', is a play on Adam's `Invisible Hand', which is the metaphor used to explain the way a natural economy is able to create complex systems with no central control. Just like the play on words implies, `the invisible heart' refers to the way a free-economy naturally helps the poor, sick and unable, all without coercion. It also has a double meaning, in describing the `heart' of economists and those who believe in free-markets. At one point a character describes economists as `a grim lot, only concerned with money', this book dispenses with that notion.

Roberts is incredibly fair-minded (though not `equality-minded.'). He makes points about the environment, charity, and admits that free-markets sometimes hurt people. Robert's doesn't sugarcoat anything, but displays it in its full context.

My favorite part of the book is Sam's final speech. For too long people have been holding on to the misconception that economics is only about money, this has never been true; an economic `value' can not be measured in a purely monetary way, `matters of the heart', or human motivation, needs, and wants; are the biggest part of economics, not the transfer of goods or services. At one point Sam proclaims, "The purpose of life is to live as richly as possible", a statement which is not about money, one that I think most would agree with.

With Roberts's first novel, `The Choice', he entertained me, with this novel; he has earned a loyal reader. Some say `write what you know', others say, `write what your passionate about', in this case Roberts has done both; his knowledge and passion for the subject matter and the characters comes out in every page, which makes for an incredibly enjoyable read.