Nobel Committee Stuns Economists and Awards 2007 Nobel Prize In Economics To Thomas Malthus

Friday, October 12, 2007

Oslo, Norway - In a surprising move today, the Nobel Committee awarded the 2007 Nobel Prize In Economics to Thomas Malthus. One reason this award is shocking is simply because Malthus has been dead for almost 173 years. The Committee has given posthumous awards before, but has never reached this far back in time for an award candidate.

The other, and even more shocking, reason is that Malthus’ predictions about the demise of the human race due to food shortages have proven to be completely false.

In his “An Essay on the Principle of Population”, first published in 1798, Malthus predicted “The power of population is so superior to the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race”.

Critics of the award have wondered aloud why the award was given to an economist who is so often mocked by modern economists, not only for making doomsday predictions about the future of the world and its population but for using flawed scientific theories and, some say, outright lies, to support his arguments.

In the citation, the Nobel committee stated, “While his methods were, at best, flawed and, at worst, downright dishonest and manipulative, we feel Mr. Malthus is probably the single individual who has done most to create
greater worldwide understanding of the economic issues he was concerned with. Frankly, his determination to sacrifice his integrity for a cause that meant so much to him, despite it being a non-issue, really touched us. What a guy.”

Response from economists on the issue has not been positive. “I’ve worked for 25 years to study the effects of government intervention on welfare recipients”, said one University of Chicago economist, “and they give the prize to an irrelevant has-been? I may give up my tenure and join the ministry. Why go on doing this?”

Kenneth Arrow, professor of Economics at Stanford University, has threatened to sue the Committee for effectively devaluing his prize, which he won in 1972. “It’s worthless, now”, said Arrow. “If an idiot like Malthus can win, any bozo off the street with a pen could write a winning paper. Good heavens.”

Most notable economists have called for the creation of a prize that would reward research that not only breaks new ground in Economics, but is done transparently and openly with results that can be replicated. “Basically, we want a prize that does what we thought the Nobel Prize did before,” said Arrow.

US vs China

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Some people think the US is being taken over as a superpower in the world. I doubt it, but I need proof. Today, I found a tiny, tiny piece.

This article shows that the richest person in China has a fortune of $16.

This page shows that there are 15 people in the US that are richer than her.

15:1 is a good, healthy ratio.

Next question, does it matter? Probably not.

New Template

Just letting you know that I've updated my blog template. I'll be making little changes over the next few days. Let me know what you think in the comments.

Repeat After Me, Don Wildmon...There's No Such Thing As Bad Publicity

A long time ago, I signed a petition for the AFA. I don't know why, since online petitions are meaningless and unverifiable. Anyway, I signed some petition, which entitled me to a lifelong subscription to the AFA's "ActionAlert" emails.

In case you don't know, the AFA is a conservative organization that promotes family values. I completely agree with that part of it. But the things they come up with as issues continue to astound me.

For instance, today I got an email with the following headline:
"Big Media Ignores San Francisco Homosexual Event"
My first reaction was, "That's great! The media is refusing to give them any free publicity! Or at least ignoring them." I thought the email was going to be a celebration that the media ignored some big homosexual rally. Perhaps it's the first step in the process of not being governed by an extremely vocal (albeit well accessorized) minority.

Upon opening the email, though, I found that the AFA was actually COMPLAINING that "Big Media" had ignored the event.

WHAT?

The best possible thing that could be done with the gay movement is to ignore it's protests and "celebrations" and refuse to promote them any further. "Big Media" actually chose to do this.

And the AFA is complaining?

But wait, there's more!

Not only did the AFA complain that the media ignored the event, the AFA posted pictures from said event, ON THEIR OWN WEBSITE!!!

WHAT THE HECK, AFA!!!!

How did you get the pictures, anyway? Why do you want me to see them? I don't have to eat poop to know that I don't want to eat poop.

I've unsubscribed from their mailing list before, but I still get their "ActionAlert" emails. Heaven forbid I not be aware of every instance of smut in existence and have easy, one-click access to it. I swear the AFA is run by Playboy or somebody. Good heavens.

The American Family Association...Purveyors of Fine Smut Since 1854

When I was growing up, I heard a stand-up comedian tell the following joke (I'm paraphrasing):
"I was eating with my girlfriend the other night, when the waiter brings her some coffee. She takes a sip and nearly chokes. She looks at me and says 'oh, this tastes awful, try some'. What? There's no way I'm going near that stuff. She just told me it was awful"
I am reminded of that joke (which has come true in my life many times!) each time I get an email from the American Family Association.

The AFA has a noble mission. They want to defend family values wherever they are under attack. Fine. I feel the same way. My issue is with their method, those "ActionAlert" emails. And their website, too.

For example, if they think something on TV is extremely offensive, they want you to sign a petition to have it banned, burned, eaten and regurgitated and it's author made to apologize while wearing nothing but an American flag. Or was that part of my nightmare last night?

Anyway, in order to get you in a good, petition-signing mood, they want you to be extra offended. How do they do that?

BY GIVING YOU A LINK TO THE OFFENSIVE MATERIAL!!

What's that? You don't want to watch something offensive? That's okay, because THEY ALSO DESCRIBE, IN SOME DETAIL, ALL THE BAD THINGS YOU WOULD SEE IN THE VIDEO!!

I can't understand why they don't realize that they are simply a delivery mechanism for the very, and I use this word advisedly, crap they're trying to have banned. They even host some of the videos and pictures on their own servers. Seriously, what the heck? "We must stop people from being exposed to morally questionable material. Better send a link to it"...

This all hearkens back to the punchline of that joke I mentioned.

"Here, this is extremely offensive to you. Watch it."

No, thanks, AFA. I already know there's crap out there. I'll vote with my wallet and not subscribe to cable or watch TV. No, I won't sign your petition because online petitions are useless by definition.

You should try this coffee, though. It's terrible.

Cute, but...?

Monday, October 08, 2007

This is REALLY cute: http://www.dnaco.net/~vogelke/pictures/how-to-hug-a-baby/

My question is, if the dog had been hungry/rabid, etc., would they still have posted the pictures? I mean, if I were watching this with a camera and would have seen picture 2 happening, I'm pretty sure I would have done something.

Advice For Living In Texas

Except for #s 22 and 28, I think, as a Texan, this list is surprisingly accurate. Since I've never had tea or alcohol, I can't speak to 22 and 28.

It Wasn't Supposed To Happen

Sunday, October 07, 2007

This has never happened before. At least not the way it did today.

It shattered the trust that has defined our entire relationship from the first day.

I suppose I knew it had to happen, but I wasn't prepared for it when it did.

At first I wasn't sure we could repair the damage that was done. But, after time, it seemed we would be able to reconcile.

Until it happened again.

Both times, it all happened so fast, I just lost control.

Both times I watched my son slip from my hands and fall...

...about three inches and hit his left temple on the floor. He cried and fussed and since it happened about 10 minutes before his nap, there was no way he was calming down. After Heidi and I both held him for a while we just put him down and he was fine.

But it was a little traumatic for me, since when he has been hurt to the point of crying before, it was always his fault. This time, it was mine, although he did do the lurching. But it was me who didn't quite catch him in time. Poor little guy. The worst part was the look of fear in his eyes, where there used to be innocence and hope. I hope I didn't steal some little part of his childhood. It'll happen some time, just not by me, I hope.

We're all better now, though, and life is good. He's napping.

Are You A Pedophile If...

Thursday, October 04, 2007

...you think your wife is hot in a picture where she is under 18? Just asking...

Why Are Women Unhappy?

Monday, October 01, 2007

On the Freakonomics Blog today, there is an interesting post about why women might be unhappy. They posit 4 reasons, most of them to do with data biases. The reasons are interesting and make sense but Victoria Randell made an observation in the comments that I think gets more at the real reason:
"Why when we’re looking at equality do we only look at work? sure we’re doing better there but the glass ceiling is at home. Before we had full time jobs at home, now we have full time paid jobs then come home and have another full time job. and we call this progress?"
Scenario 1:
  • You have no boss
  • Your one co-worker is in love with you and you with them
  • You set your own schedule
  • You work hard and the work always improves the quality of life of those you work for/with
  • You have no commute
  • You have the option of leaving your primary office when you want to run errands, go to museums, etc.
  • You can eat whatever you want for lunch
  • You can do whatever you want because you're in charge
Scenario 2:
  • You have a boss who may or may not care about you
  • You have many co-workers that don't love you, may not like you and may want your job
  • You don't set your own schedule
  • Your work may/may not be important and there may be downtime where you sit there
  • You have a commute
  • You can't leave during the day unless it's at lunch
  • You have to bring your lunch or eat out
  • All rights are based on what's "fair" for you and your co-workers; little to no individual circumstances are considered (e.g., dress code, hours)
Somehow the feminist movement convinced women that Scenario 2 is what they wanted. If I picked Scenario 2 over Scenario 1, I'd be unhappy, too.

Favorites...

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Not that anyone asked, but I thought I'd list out my 5 favorites posts from this blog:

5. Hilarious Craigslist Post
4. How to Play Ball Against Teen Wolf
3. Should Government Regulate Broadcasts?
2. Gay Marriage - My Take
1. Abortion

Some are my favorites because they're funny, some because I still really like my position and thoughts on the issues. Which do you like?