Monday, September 26, 2005
HALF TIME SHOW
Judge Richard Posner enters the fray sparked by the New York Times article about the work expectations of young women at "elite" colleges with his own pragmatic (some call it "loony") twist:
Posner proposes a gender-neutral solution to this dilemma, a back-door increased tuition for education "wasters":
When do the transaction costs of administering such a rebate program exceed its benefits? Pretty quickly, I'd say. If you want more women to work despite being married (with or without kids), it'd be easier to just get rid of the "marriage penalty" tax.
... the fact that a significant percentage of places in the best professional schools are being occupied by individuals [such as women who are not going to have full working careers] who are not going to obtain the maximum possible value from such an education is troubling from an overall economic standpoint. Education tends to confer external benefits, that is, benefits that the recipient of the education cannot fully capture in the higher income that the education enables him to obtain after graduation.Less participation in the work force by professionals = fewer external benefits to society.
Posner proposes a gender-neutral solution to this dilemma, a back-door increased tuition for education "wasters":
... raise tuition to all students but couple the raise with a program of rebates for graduates who work full time. For example, they might be rebated 1 percent of their tuition for each year they worked full time.But higher income taxes paid by higher-paid workers are only one external societal benefit we'd want to encourage. The societal costs of single parent headed families is well known. So all those hyper driven law firm partners and businessmen who shed their first wife and family should forfeit their 1% rebate. Furthermore, as Posner himself points out, a good education can act as a "hedge against divorce or other economic misfortune." Avoiding the costs to society of impoverished families is an external benefit as well. So women who return to the work force to support their families after divorce or widowhood should get an additional 1%. How about a half percent to post-grads who stay married in the first place?
When do the transaction costs of administering such a rebate program exceed its benefits? Pretty quickly, I'd say. If you want more women to work despite being married (with or without kids), it'd be easier to just get rid of the "marriage penalty" tax.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
I SCREAM YOU SCREAM
The arabic inscription for Allah apparently resembles a spinning ice cream cone. Burger King has let the cat out of the bag:
(Via Agenda)
A "business development manager," Rashad Akhtar, 27, of High Wycombe, spotted the sacrilege and called on Muslims to boycott Burger King. Burger King, showing its independent-minded nature, promptly withdrew the product from the market.
But you can't put the cat back in the bag. Allah = ice cream. It explains a lot.
(Via Agenda)
A "business development manager," Rashad Akhtar, 27, of High Wycombe, spotted the sacrilege and called on Muslims to boycott Burger King. Burger King, showing its independent-minded nature, promptly withdrew the product from the market.
But you can't put the cat back in the bag. Allah = ice cream. It explains a lot.
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
REALITY BITES ... AND SPITS UP
The New York Times reports that the young 'uns have figured out it's tough to be a good parent at the same time you're climbing the corporate ladder at break-neck speed:
The article also threatens future mommies with the idea that these expensive educations may be wasted on them:
It's nearly impossible to predict how one will choose to solve dilemmas that are five to twenty years in the future, but at least these kids know the dilemma is out there. Pretending a gal can have it all, both satisfying full-stop career and yummy family, is just setting up the vast majority for bitter disappointment.
For the record, my solution has been part-time work and a supportive extended family. I hope that this flexible work arrangement becomes available to more women. Perhaps employers will get over their allergy to part-time schedules as their labor needs confront the waves of aging baby boomers. Something is going to have to give and it won't be the boomers. It never is.
Good discussions of the article at: Ann Althouse, Number 2 Pencil and The Anchoress.
UPDATES: (1) The New York Times has certainly accomplished its goal of getting people to talk about its articles (this what-I-want-to-be-when-I-grow-up write-up became a "Most E-Mailed" article on the newspaper's Web site). So what if much of the talk is criticism? Jack Shafer of Slate claws at the lack of data supporting the piece. (2) Michael of 2Blowhards enjoys watching the defiance of '70s-feminist dogma but bristles at the Times' focus on "elite" schools.
Many women at the nation's most elite colleges say they have already decided that they will put aside their careers in favor of raising children. Though some of these students are not planning to have children and some hope to have a family and work full time, many others, like Ms. Liu, say they will happily play a traditional female role, with motherhood their main commitment.The old-time feminists are aghast that the girls are already thinking about their baby-making function and are making plans to solve the age-old bringing-up-baby problem by taking a break from the rat race themselves.
The article also threatens future mommies with the idea that these expensive educations may be wasted on them:
The article ignores this sudden reinvocation of the neanderthals of previous generations who refused to waste time and effort on educating their daughters."It really does raise this question for all of us and for the country: when we work so hard to open academics and other opportunities for women, what kind of return do we expect to get for that?" said Marlyn McGrath Lewis, director of undergraduate admissions at Harvard, who served as dean for coeducation in the late 1970's and early 1980's.
It is a complicated issue and one that most schools have not addressed. The women they are counting on to lead society are likely to marry men who will make enough money to give them a real choice about whether to be full-time mothers, unlike those women who must work out of economic necessity.
It's nearly impossible to predict how one will choose to solve dilemmas that are five to twenty years in the future, but at least these kids know the dilemma is out there. Pretending a gal can have it all, both satisfying full-stop career and yummy family, is just setting up the vast majority for bitter disappointment.
For the record, my solution has been part-time work and a supportive extended family. I hope that this flexible work arrangement becomes available to more women. Perhaps employers will get over their allergy to part-time schedules as their labor needs confront the waves of aging baby boomers. Something is going to have to give and it won't be the boomers. It never is.
Good discussions of the article at: Ann Althouse, Number 2 Pencil and The Anchoress.
UPDATES: (1) The New York Times has certainly accomplished its goal of getting people to talk about its articles (this what-I-want-to-be-when-I-grow-up write-up became a "Most E-Mailed" article on the newspaper's Web site). So what if much of the talk is criticism? Jack Shafer of Slate claws at the lack of data supporting the piece. (2) Michael of 2Blowhards enjoys watching the defiance of '70s-feminist dogma but bristles at the Times' focus on "elite" schools.
Monday, September 19, 2005
GREAT STORY
Sunday, September 18, 2005
HOW TO TEST OUR REGARD
Yesterday (Saturday) our concrete guy:
But we still think he's great. Go figure.
- Showed up, unannounced, at 7:45 am. Household was still abed/wearing jammies, etc.
- Without copy of plans for porch (seems to have "lost" them). Also, no estimate for costs of work.
- Dropped sample brick on my shoeless left foot.
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
A PRAIRIE HOME BULLY
Look, this happens all the time. Someone has a brand name and enough cash to register it as a trademark. Someone else without a lot of cash makes fun of the trademark. The trademark owner has his attorney send a scary "cease and desist letter" because he's pissed at being made fun of and the attorney doesn't know enough to control his client. The recipient feels bullied (he's right, that's the point of the letter) but has to cave because he doesn't have the resources to fight.
In this case, the pissed guy is (liberal comedian) Garrison Keillor and the guys who made fun of him by selling "A Praire Ho Companion" t-shirts are the proprietors of (liberal) local blog MNSpeak. And they've given in, for now.
This is a dumb fight. The t-shirts aren't so clever (MNSpeak admits they haven't sold many of them and didn't planned to reorder) but no one was going to think they were endorsed by Garrison Keillor, so trademark law (which is intended to prevent consumer confusion) shouldn't apply. A kinder letter could have easily persuaded MNSpeak to stop selling the t-shirts without making them feel like the school yard bully has just shaken them down. Minnesota Nice is a useful skill not apparently practiced by Mr. Keillor and his counselor.
Finally! Liberals now have a rock solid example of where diplomacy might have worked but instead they sent in the troops to stop the WMD's (which, as it turned out, were not being replenished). Yes, they can declare victory. But are Mr. Keillor's approval ratings slipping?
MNSpeak may not have money to hire a lawyer to defend it, but it owns a modern-style printing press and the possibility of sparking a blogswarm (Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit has done his part). Here's our contribution: back off Garrison!
In this case, the pissed guy is (liberal comedian) Garrison Keillor and the guys who made fun of him by selling "A Praire Ho Companion" t-shirts are the proprietors of (liberal) local blog MNSpeak. And they've given in, for now.
This is a dumb fight. The t-shirts aren't so clever (MNSpeak admits they haven't sold many of them and didn't planned to reorder) but no one was going to think they were endorsed by Garrison Keillor, so trademark law (which is intended to prevent consumer confusion) shouldn't apply. A kinder letter could have easily persuaded MNSpeak to stop selling the t-shirts without making them feel like the school yard bully has just shaken them down. Minnesota Nice is a useful skill not apparently practiced by Mr. Keillor and his counselor.
Finally! Liberals now have a rock solid example of where diplomacy might have worked but instead they sent in the troops to stop the WMD's (which, as it turned out, were not being replenished). Yes, they can declare victory. But are Mr. Keillor's approval ratings slipping?
MNSpeak may not have money to hire a lawyer to defend it, but it owns a modern-style printing press and the possibility of sparking a blogswarm (Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit has done his part). Here's our contribution: back off Garrison!
Thursday, September 08, 2005
NOW THIS IS HOW TO PLAY THE BLAME GAME!
Two camps have developed about who is to blame for the catastrophe sparked by Hurricane Katrina. One camp fingers President Bush and his FEMA and Homeland Security cohorts. The other is down on state and local errors. It looks to us that there's a lot of ammunition for both groups' theories.
But a dark horse has now emerged. Championed by a meteorologist from Pocatello, Idaho: the Japanese mafia or gangster group known as the Yakuza. Plus, he warns, we ain't seen nothing yet:
But a dark horse has now emerged. Championed by a meteorologist from Pocatello, Idaho: the Japanese mafia or gangster group known as the Yakuza. Plus, he warns, we ain't seen nothing yet:
The Yakuza can shoot another Katrina anytime they wish. Watch for yet another one, which is probably being debated right now.He also recommends everyone stock up on precious metals.
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
IF YOU BUILD IT, THEY MIGHT DROWN
Our favorite sourpuss, Judge Richard Posner, explores the question that got Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, into such hot water last week: should New Orleans be rebuilt?
After the horror of last week, he heaps another worry on my fretfire: "Breaches similar to those that caused the recent flood, but created without warning by terrorist bombs, would cause much greater loss of life because there would be no time to evacuate the population."
Now that makes me want to down a Hurricane.
To decide whether to rebuild or abandon the City, the cost of reconstruction, plus the expected cost of a future such disaster, should be compared to the cost of either building a new city or, what would be cheaper and faster, simply relocating the present inhabitants to existing cities, towns, etc., a solution that would require merely the construction of some additional commercial and residential facilities, plus some additional infrastructure. Of course New Orleans has great historic and sentimental value, and this should be factored into the analysis, but it should not be given conclusive weight. Perhaps it should be given little weight, since the historic portions of the city (the French Quarter and the Garden District) might be rebuilt and preserved as a tourist site, much like Colonial Williamsburg, without having to be part of a city.Posner has never been accused of being sentimental. Or shy of controversy. Mardi Gras-land, anyone?
After the horror of last week, he heaps another worry on my fretfire: "Breaches similar to those that caused the recent flood, but created without warning by terrorist bombs, would cause much greater loss of life because there would be no time to evacuate the population."
Now that makes me want to down a Hurricane.
Friday, September 02, 2005
HOBBES WAS RIGHT
I am riveted and horrified by the news of the post-Katrina disasters. I am angry at what seems to be the poor planning, or perhaps poor execution by authorities, and the failure to prevent what is becoming a Southern hellhole. I don't even know anyone from the affected area. If I'm angry, I can't imagine how someone closer to the catastrophe feels.
What good has the wake-up call of 9/11 been? Where has the money we've poured into preparedness efforts gone if this is the result? How can the residents of any city or town feel at all safe if this most predictable disaster has caused such havoc?
If someone told me I was to be punished for some infraction with exile to either Baghdad or New Orleans, I would choose Baghdad.
What good has the wake-up call of 9/11 been? Where has the money we've poured into preparedness efforts gone if this is the result? How can the residents of any city or town feel at all safe if this most predictable disaster has caused such havoc?
If someone told me I was to be punished for some infraction with exile to either Baghdad or New Orleans, I would choose Baghdad.
