Serving the Constituency of Self

Share

As I've written to my elected representatives about the Bailout Bill it seems apparent to me that they don't care one whit what I think. No sooner than did the bill go down to resounding defeat than they turned around and discussed writing another different bill that might pass. As of today, I've heard from only one person to whom I wrote on the matter, and that was Congressman Jon Porter (R-NV), rationalizing why he voted in favor of increased concentration of power at the federal level.

Although I've never seen the American people resound so strongly against something, they can't let it lie. It's all about what they want, and they want more power. At first, it was all I could do to reach them. So many people registered their voice on the matter that it shut down the switchboard and the email handler for Congress. Although I already knew Harry Reid could care less, Jon Porter's response surprised and frustrated me since I was going to campaign for him against Dina Titus. I know Dina Titus doesn't give a flying flapjack either, but apparently Jon Porter doesn't want to stay in office.

His service apparently riddled with controversy, it was my initial idea to run against him for the nomination, but I missed the deadline. When I heard about Titus, I knew I couldn't let her get in, but I really grow tired of voting self-servants instead of public servants into office. In this instance, apparently Porter followed Bush's lead, which was to do what the Democrats wanted. In terms of Porter's campaign, this event undermines their criticism of Porter following Bush, since Bush followed them. If the president from an opposing party sides with them, how can anyone who follows him be really that bad for them?

Career politicians are bad for America. The longer they stay in Washington, the more they grow disconnected from their constituents at home and the more they answer to constituents with money. That's the plot of "Mr Smith Goes to Washington". How prophetic it seems to be, irrespective of party. Voting more power to government is akin to political suicide in Constitutional Republics, but maybe he's just out to get as much for himself as he can while still in office and then take the money and run.

I can't vote for the Marxist, but I don't want Porter thinking I condone his actions. Catch 22.

The FM/FM Affair

Share

Although the buzzwords Fanny Mac and Freddy May no longer appear in the media, the current economic “crisis” still revolves around their dubious business practices. In the end, people know the FM/FM Affair precipitated the Panic of 2008 and what could become the Socialist Act of 2008 as Congress mulls bailout bill after bailout bill, designed not so much to benefit us as much as to use this excuse to seize power.

Compare the FM/FM Affair to the October surprise of 2006. Back then, remember they paraded CEOs from Enron, Imclone, Worldcom, and others before the court tribunal and then rejoiced as the convicts shuttled off to jail. Today, the disgraced CEOs of FM/FM, Bear-Stearns, Lehman, etc., hold prominent and lucrative positions in Barack Obama’s campaign staff, and projectedly his cabinet should he win the election. The duplicity with which these thieves have been treated reminds me of the Buccaneer Theory of Economics practized by the Democrat party. While the media used to expose corruption in high places, they now protect it if Democrats occupy those echelons (assuming of course those Democrats agree with them politically).

In the current blame game, they dress it up in an ambiguous recognition of guilt, which is tantamount to absolving everyone of blame. Two years ago, the media spent weeks on George Allen saying “mukahkah” and Trent Lott’s suggestive emails to a page (charges were recently dismissed), and now they give every Democrat a pass who benefitted from the FM/FM Affair. Yes, John McCain received some sum ($50K) from FM/FM, but the top four recipients, totaling $750,000 include the following in descending order: Chris Dodd (D-CN), Barack Obama (D-IL), Hillary Clinton (D-NY), and John Kerry (D-MA). All of them have within the past four years been involved running for President of the United States. I trust them as far as I can throw the universe. How about you?

We Now Return to Our Show Already in Progress

Share

For those of you wondering why I haven't "written" anything in a while, there was a problem with my automatic feed to this website that has hopefully been resolved, and so the articles will be restored according to our regular schedule. That being said, given the new time demands and restraints occasioned by my promotion, I may not post every day, but I will try to post multiple entries per week.

Cheers.

R.E.N.T.

Share

Before I move into my analysis, let me credit another thinkpiece for this idea who made a fairly good analysis of the current situation. As we consider the bailout concept fronted by Congress, consider if you will how many people who own homes should be renting and how easily they could lower the accounts payable if they’d simply RENT.

When I sold my home in 2005, I sold it for exactly twice what it originally cost me, at the height of the housing market. I sold the home because I could no longer afford it, having finished the term of my graduate school fellowship, and my wife and I moved into a rental arrangement until I could find other work, and then we eventually divorced. Shortly after the sale, the market started to fall, but we didn’t look for anything because we couldn’t afford to pay the high prices even assuming I still had my graduate money coming in. Fortunately for me, my home covered all of our combined debt after living in it for only two years, which is uncommon. Normally, I could have expected maximum of $30K profit from the home, which would have only covered 60% of my other debt.

By contrast, a relatively close acquaintance of mine tried in that same time frame to flip three homes and upgrade his young family to their dream home. When last we spoke, he was still working overtime as a radiologist to cover two mortgages occasioned by his speculation.

In his article, Jack Hough points out that, barring extraordinary circumstances, houses return nothing on the investment. Even if they appreciate 10%/year, after 7% inflation/year and incidental costs, houses are more like some place you stick your money for later, assuming someone will buy it later. Depending on the neighborhood and jobs 40 years from now when you come to sell your home, you may not be able to get rid of it, especially if the market is flooded with homes. The California migration to Nevada in 2004-2005 dove demand up, and as a result I made a killing on my home, but aside from unpredictable events like this, you won’t actually make a killing on a home, especially since you pay closing costs when you buy and agent fees when you sell, that take huge chunks out of your profits (I know I paid $3000 in commissions when I bought the home to the title company and my mortgage broker and $18000 to the real estate agency in commissions to sell that home).

House returns will not in the future match those of the past. The home I sold for $310,000 has already dropped in price back to $250,000 (last I checked- it’s still for sale and has been unoccupied since I sold it- another speculator bought it [sigh]), and with banks tightening lending standards and people losing their homes the pool of potential buyers shrinks even as the pool of available homes continues rising. Even if the prices stabilize, they will progress at a much retarded pace over the next few years/decades, giving much less potential for profits compared to stocks which have lost 25%+ of their value in the last year. They’re all on sale too.

Renting absolves you of payment for many things. You indirectly pay property tax, but you don’t have to worry about the bill. Your landlord bears responsibility for repairs and maintenance. Renter’s insurance deals with your belongings, and if you don’t own the house you save on costs. Renting costs you nothing in terms of your credit rating (although it also doesn’t help), and while some may tout the mortgage deduction from taxes, does it really make sense to pay an extra $6000/year to save $600 in taxes (based on a rent payment of $500 versus a mortgage of $1000 and a reduction in income tax bracket from 25% to 15%)? The money spent obtaining and maintaining (down payment and incidental repairs) a home might best be spent acquiring other things that bring wealth.

End of the Line

Share

The other day when I arrived at work, I entered the lab to check up on the status of equipment, materials, etc. for the students and found the lab in disarray. As if the door being unlocked with iBooks, microscopes, and other items thereby unsecured against whomever might desire one was not enough, I found materials expended and waste inappropriately discarded. Last week, I sent an email around asking them to correct these problems. Apparently nobody listened.

Normally, it falls to professors to watch the students clean up before they leave. Having myself taught, I know that sounds easier than it is. As you work, they move you around the room, answering questions and monitoring progress, and so you’re not there to micromanage their every action. However, every waste receptacle is labeled (assuming they are literate enough to read the signs), and university policy is quite clear: if you leave the lab dirty, be prepared to lose points.

Someone suggested that, since I’ve already reminded and admonished the professors to take proper care of waste, I leave the mess. The problem with that is that while I am prepared to deal with the eventualities of glass in the drain and in the regular garbage, biohazard waste not properly disposed of, and a general mess on the table, it gives me no license to subject the students to the dangers of lacerations and blood borne pathogens occasioned by slipshod waste management. If I leave the labs in disarray and the students complain, university management will write me up. The buck stops with me.

This type of dutiful responsibility comes naturally to me, both as a function of my character and as a result of my employ. While working for UPS in college, I ended up in a dubious place of honor at the very end of the conveyor belt. Practically, this implied that all of the missed picks, missorts, etc. came to my work area and clogged up the space allotted to me for my work until someone could haul them away. Even more, this necessitated that I handle many more packages than I ought because I dealt with many never intended to come anywhere near me. With my large volume, I sometimes fell behind due to this phenomenon, which prevented me from getting my work done when other people aren’t doing theirs.

For all this, I received nothing but verbal gratitude. I didn’t do it for rewards or better pay or a special parking spot. I did it because long ago I swore an oath on my honor to do my duty to God and Country. Someone must take responsibility, and if other people abdicate it, oftentimes I end up footing the bill.

What They Want to Hear

Share

Despite my better judgment, I took a phone call from the Obama Campaign today taking a “poll” about the upcoming election. I know they called me because, since 2000, I’ve been a registered Democrat. They launched into a series of questions that eventually led up to ascertaining my degree of support for the Democrat presidential nominee.

As soon as I informed them I was “Very Unlikely” to change my mind and vote for Obama in November, the pollster promptly hung up on me. (What I actually said was that God would have to personally appear to me and command me to vote for Obama.) Obviously I didn’t tell her what she wanted to hear. Obama’s campaign wants to be able to report to pollsters in battleground states like Nevada that they have stalwart backing not only from their registered constituency but also from the populace at large.

In every election, the media writes what Rush Limbaugh calls “editorials masquerading as news” based on poorly designed statistical endeavors to create impressions in the mind of people in states like Nevada that Obama is going to take the state in a landslide. Yet, drive through my Henderson neighborhood, and you’ll find in a half mile square only TWO Obama signs, both of which have been there since before the primary. There is no apparent excitement about the Democrat nominee among my neighbors.

I’m not enamored with McCain, but I cannot in good conscience vote for a Marxist who, even if you believe intends to rule well, means to rule. Obama would wrest control of the country from them to whom it rightly belongs- the people, and he does it while telling us what we want to hear. Be honest with us and yourself Mr. Obama- you’re the Boy Who Would Be King.

Journal of Negative Results

Share

Some time ago, partly as a joke, and partly in honest recognition of a need, I proposed the establishment of a new scientific journal- the Journal of Negative Results.

Today, it went active, and you can view it here.

Yes, this will affect my posting on THIS blog.

My First Link...

Share

I noticed today that I got my first external link to this blog. If you already had one I don't know about, I apologize, but this really got me giddy. Yes, tis true.

It's in the "Better Place to Put Links" section of the blog.

Crisis Mode

Share

People who know me know that I hate crisis. I prefer tons of prevention upfront to preclude uncomfortable eventualities in the aftermath. Yet, we spent this week watching Congress in crisis mode- with all its inefficiencies in resplendent display for all to see, and after all is said and done, nothing is done at all. The same people praising Congress for its quick “action” are the same people who excoriated FEMA after Katrina for not moving in more quickly to help the people but ignored the LA governor and New Orleans Mayor who did squat to preclude let alone alleviate the suffering of their people.

Just how big IS the crisis? Depending on where you read, anywhere from 90-98% of Americans are paying their mortgages, meaning that we’re getting our panties in a wad over some small fraction of the country that made poor fiduciary posturing for their own personal wealth. Bailing them out, the few, is not in the interest of the majority of Americans, who are by any report by and large meeting their financial obligations on every hand.

If it’s that big of a crisis, why did the Democrats allow the weekend to come without voting on anything in the House? They have more than sufficient votes along party lines to railroad anything through Congress without any Republican support. They even have the Bush Administration backing bailout bills, and yet they could not take the time to put forth a bill that was easy to understand and put changes into action quickly on the floor of the House for a vote. When there’s a crisis, people act; they don’t talk about acting. Obviously, it’s an opportunity for them to manipulate a situation under garb of a crisis to usurp more power from the people.

We do not need more laws. We need to enforce the ones we have. Freddy May and Fanny Mac and the whole kitten caboodle were not in correct application of accounting rules- they were cooking the books to earn their CEOs big bonuses, some of which are now ranking members of Obama’s staff. In fact before a congressional hearing in 2004, former Clinton OMB appointee and former Fanny/Freddy CEO Franklin Raines (who raked in 1.2 million in bonuses) referred to these subprime loans as “riskless”. Now they’re singing a different tune.

Miss America Pageant Theorem of Leadership

Share

Off and on throughout the year, my sister and I laugh at that scene from "Miss Congeniality" where Sandra Bullock says she thinks the world needs, "Tougher punishment for parole violators….and of course world peace." Noble though a desire for world peace may be, it is not possible unless all the people on the planet decide at the same time to adopt it, which is neither practical nor likely. Yet, so many people think that this attitude means being a leader.



Many of our leaders ask, "Can't we all get along?" displaying a naiveté unparalleled among the leaders of men throughout time. Said Rush Limbaugh long ago, "Concensus is the absence of leadership," and so how can it be leadership to be always ready and willing to work with your enemies? These people talk big plans and big ideas about how we need them and then and only then will the world be better.



We have serious problems, and we need serious people to solve them. These kind of idealistic solutions are neither realistic nor practical in the world as it is. We need to learn to see the world as it is, not as we would like it to be, if we wish to reform it to become more perfect than it is. If you don't see clearly where it is, how can you move it where you want it?



Every time I get new glasses, it takes a while for my eyes to adjust. The first time I got glasses, I learned quickly that the light refracts the image such that it appears slightly smaller and slightly shifted from where it actually is, if I were to stretch out a straight stick in the direction I think it is. If I reach for it, as I get closer, I can adjust, but I don't actually see things the way they are.



Cliché though it seems, Sandra Bullock's answer embodies the full width and breadth of what we really need in leadership. We need someone who loves the law and who believes in it. DeToqueville said in his book that in America the law is king. It's time we acted like it.

Going Green is a Red Herring

Share

Some of the things mentioned in this article are things I’ve discussed, but this article put them very succinctly.

Organic Foods

Organic materials simply stated contain carbon. Therefore, technically, anything and everything that contains carbon is organic, from petroleum products to battleships to the computer you’re reading this entry on. The premise that being organic somehow makes something better than an inorganic object flies at the heart of bigotry and lies more in the realm of semantic preference than in scientific proof.

Despite what they tell you, nobody has scientifically demonstrated that organic foods are better for you than nonorganic sources. My milk says the FDA has not shown that milk from cows treated with hormones is worse than organic milk. As a plant scientist, I know that ultimately the only thing that makes a difference in nutrition of a foodstuff is the age and health of the source at the time of harvest. For fruits and vegetables, much of what we eat is largely waste not because there’s anything wrong with it but rather that workers pick the fruits before veraison is complete. Plants make fruits and vegetables for reproduction (in general), and so they wait until the opportune moment before filling the fruit with most of the nutrients for which we consume them. This is why they should be eaten in season, or better yet, grow your own. That way you know they were picked at opportune ripeness.

Besides regular food transport, the value to the “environment” is mitigated by the expense in time, money and materials bringing organic goods to market. The further an organic source lies from its destination, the more any “organic growing practices” (whatever the Hoboken than means) employed in husbandry of those foodstuffs cancels out the pollution created by the truck that delivers it to you. More often than not, it’s a null sum game, which is fine and well, but hardly a solution to “fix” the “environment”.

For these reasons- transportation and maturation- the only way to provide your body with better food lies in producing as much of it yourself as possible. Most people can’t refine sugar in their homes or add preservatives. I don’t even know offhand if you can buy BHT as an individual to put in your bottled fruit, or CaCl2 as an anti-caking agent. Only if the produce remains under your control can you be sure that 1. It contains nothing adverse to health and 2. It contains the things beneficial to health that made you want to eat it in the first place.

While working as a graduate student, one of our researchers turned us on to carcinogens known as ethyl carbamates. These compounds spontaneously occur in wine as a result of chemical reactions between alcohol and unresolved amino acids floating in the wine. Where they become a problem occurs when people in the chain of custody do not maintain the same standards as enforced on the producer and elective at the level of the consumer. If at any point from the vineyard to your table the wine rises above 70F, ethyl carbamates will be produced, mitigating any health “benefit” of wine, and those benefits, if they work at all, are only in red wines.

As a scientist, I have a healthy dose of circumspect as regards the sweeping claims of “experts”, many of whom are often refuted and surprised when unexpected things occur. In the end, you can’t control everything, so even produce from your own garden isn’t going to be as good as possible. Not everyone has time or interest to become a master gardener. However, all of you paying extra money at places like Whole Foods under the supposition that master gardeners deliver you a superior product ought to consider that the products sold there are only as good as the newest, greenest, least experienced farm hand or transport associate involved in bringing it to market. You never know if the person who had a hand in what you’re buying isn’t doing it right because it’s his first day or it’s company policy to allow such dereliction of service.

Disclaimer: the author has nothing against stores like Whole Foods. He just thinks they fail the cost-benefit ratio analysis.

Round-trip Trip-up

Share

I read this article briefly the other day about Hulk Hogan’s divorce. Although I’m not a Hogan fan, I remember laughing for a different reason a few years ago when he launched a sitcom called “Hogan Knows Best” where he was going to show us how a wrestler makes a family work. Whatever the reason for his divorce, I appreciate his efforts at trying to show America a different way, a tougher way, to raise children. I think America’s children need more discipline, more boundaries, and more parenting, especially where parents are afraid to upset their kids. You can’t be their friend; you must be their parents.

It’s also commendably brave to put your beliefs and theories on display after this fashion for all the world to see. When I wrote my first book, my best friend’s first comment revolved around his awe for my willingness to put myself out there for criticism by others. Whether the sitcom led to the divorce or revealed reasons that served as sufficient grounds now, I’m laughing for a different reason. Hogan certainly knows about something. He’s sure worth a lot of money.

All my best sir, except for where you may not have concertedly try to do yours.

Toilet Paper Theory on Relationships

Share

I know and speak with a lot of people who abide by very different moral codes than the one by which I choose to live my life. Many of them seem to misunderstand the fundamentals by which one forges lasting relationships, as evidenced by the choices they make and the preferences in their selections of persons with whom to enter relationships. After the guys with whom they elect to "hook up" stop talking to them when they say they want to take it slow or cut back on the physical aspects of relationships, they vilify all men and ask me why.

These "guys" with whom they choose to associate are not real men. Quite frankly, I cannot understand why they want to be with this kind of person, just based on their physical attributes. Amazingly enough, good looks and good morals rarely coincide.

In the end, they choose people with whom they can fool around, planning afterwards to part ways forever. However common this eventuality may be, I find it highly illogical and contrary to happiness. This attitude represents basically my relationship with toilet paper. I connect with it in a way I connect with nothing else on earth, then I flush it away and have no desire to see it again. What is the point of that?

If it's not lasting, was it ever real? I don't understand the point of pursuing things that we believe or plan from the outset to be abandoned. That's like investing your entire life into a project you know is doomed to fail, but you choose to participate anyway, help make it fail. Yet, this same attitude is reflected in everything else that young people endorse. It comes I'm sure from the mentality of the teenager, a mentality thank God I was blessed never to have adopted.

Growing into Love

Share

Although I’m not much a fan of the phrase “falling in love” and despite my theories on letting friendships develop and thereby make stronger and lasting relationships, I feel inclined to admit that I do not know any girl who has grown into loving someone. In my experience, if they don’t like me from the getgo, it’s not worth any more investment of time, effort and money. What I find even more irritating is that while girls won’t give us a chance if they’re not attracted initially, they want us to give them a chance, try them on for a while and see if they fit. A recent instance of a double standard with some old acquaintances from high school comes as yet another annoyance. These girls, who knew me and who I am before they saw my car or wardrobe, nevertheless choose to judge me based on what I own.

I find their projection of love and compassion somewhat disconcerting. In the recent mortgage crisis, they consider me void of feeling because I don’t want to bail out people from mortgages they never could afford. These girls extend compassion to people in foreign countries and families losing their homes that they don’t know, but despite their ovations of concern over my sordid state of affairs, they have made no actual efforts to elevate my estate. One of my students Monday night told me I need a new car but made no offer to buy me one. This sounds a lot like an excerpt from the Screwtape Letters in which Screwtape points out that the patient’s compassion to the Germans is largely imaginary and his frustration with his neighbor very real indeed.

The woman I thought I loved wanted to save the world and do all sorts of random strangers favors while at home I became a lightning rod for vitriol. Dr. Laura Schlessinger pointed out in her book Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands that women are often kinder to complete strangers than they are to their betrothed bedfellows. Fortunately for me, I just got an infusion of hope yesterday when our secretary at work showed me a picture of her very cute daughter and told me that she, like me, lives a more practical life.

Saturns Make a Great Buffer

Share

Among the many complaints people make as reasons why I can’t get a date with the type of girl I keep asking out comes the concept of my car. Despite arguments to the contrary, I believe that my car indeed sends the right message about me. It tells you what I care about. It just doesn’t happen to send the message some people think it ought to. When I debark it in a nice Italian suit, people are mystified at how I can drive such an ugly POS car like that. What I drive doesn’t matter to me, nor quite frankly does it matter what my house actually looks like. Unfortunately, they judge me by my car.

I keep an account with Wells Fargo Bank NA not because I like them as a lender but because I inherited Kim’s long-term record as a customer when we got married. According to their records, I show up as having been a customer since Kim was 14 (I inherited her record dates as a customer), and since after we sold our home we initially used Wells Fargo as a holding account for the proceeds of the sale ($150000 gross and $80000 net), I also qualified at one point as a top tier banker. While working in manual labor years ago, I took fiendish delight in visiting the bank after work when I was grimy and tired to do my banking. The tellers judged me to be some dirty grimy schmoe and treated me accordingly at first, with a marked change in their demeanor once they accessed my account and were informed as to my history as a customer. Picture if you will a teller calling a dirty and oily man “Sir” and asking if there was anything else they could do to help him before thanking him for continuing to bank with them. They incorrectly treat me with disdain at the outset based on my exterior.

It’s supposed to be what’s on the inside that counts. I am regularly criticized for not giving girls a chance to whom I am not attracted and for not giving certain girls a fair chance. One in particular who lives in Vegas now but who I took out on one date in Reno complains that I didn’t give her a fair chance. I took her on a date; that I didn’t ask her out again indicates that I had more than one good reason for not pursuing a relationship with her. I find it oddly irritating that people demand from me that I judge them by what’s on the inside while they insist I change my curb appeal despite the fact that few argue with me on my internal value.